DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/21/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-2, 4-15, 17-18 are pending in this application. Any rejection(s) and/or objection(s) made in the previous Office Action and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn due to Applicant's amendments and/or arguments in the response filed on 05/21/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed features: "one or more output belts of said fiber web forming device" in scenarios of a single, three or more output belts in claims 1, 13 and 17-18, and "a suction device" in claims 1, 10-11 and 18, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). It is noted that Applicant has elected Species 1 as depicted in Figure 1 in the reply filed 12/02/2024. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
In claim 1, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for "said drafting roller comprises a suction device";
In claim 18, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for "drafting element";
In claim 18, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for "said suction device and said drafting element outer surface being configured to be on an upper side of said at least one fiber web".
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 18, the second from the last line, "said drafting element outer surface" appears to read "said outer surface of said drafting element" for consistency and proper antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Applicant is advised that should claim(s) 5 and 12 be found allowable, claims 5 and 12 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate respectively thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "suction device" in claims 1, 10-11 and 18; and "drafting element" in claim 18.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Specifically, "drafting element" in claim 18 has been interpreted as a "cylindrical roller", based on paragraph 0056 of the specification filed 04/01/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said drafting roller comprises a suction device". However, the original disclosure does not set forth the above feature. The suction device is not shown in the elected Species as depicted in Fig. 1, and is not described in the original specification for the elected Species 1 either. The original disclosure only states "the system can also be improved by arranging that roller 10 employs suction to assist guidance of the two webs 5 and 6 between rollers 3 and 4 and the input belt 7", also in the substitute specification filed 04/01/2025 in page 8, lines 22-25. As is understood, the apparatus should include a suction device to provide suction function for the drafting roller as required; however, the suction device is not necessarily comprised by the drafting roller. Instead, the suction device may be a standalone device or included by another device within the apparatus. Therefore, claiming the limitation must be cancelled from the claim, since the claim appears to be new matter.
Claims 1, 10-11 and 18 recite the limitation "suction device" which invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the writing disclosure fails to provide any corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. There is a lack of written description for this limitation.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "said suction device and said drafting element outer surface being configured to be on an upper side of said at least one fiber web". However, the original disclosure fails to set forth the feature in the elected as depicted in Fig. 1. Noting the configuration in Fig. 1 is significantly different from that in Fig. 2, even if a suction device is included in the apparatus, the suction device and a drafting element outer surface do not necessarily be configured to be on an upper side of said at least one fiber web, especially in view of the position of the top fiber web 5 in Fig. 1. Therefore, claiming the limitation must be cancelled from the claim, since the claim appears to be new matter.
The remaining claims each depend from a rejected base claim and are likewise rejected.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 18 recites the term "in particular", which renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear whether the limitation following "in particular" is recited as part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). This rejection has been set forth in the previous Office action. For examination purposes, the examiner has interpreted that the limitation following "in particular" is recited as optional in the claim.
Claim limitation “suction device” in Claims 1, 10-11 and 18 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 10-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernhardt (US 2003/0033691 A1) in view of Collotte (US 2003/0061686 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bernhardt discloses an apparatus for forming a fiber mat (figs. 1-3; paras. 0008, 0022; claim 13), comprising:
- a fiber web-forming device (carding machine 1; figs. 1-3; para. 0022) adapted to form at least one fiber web (figs. 1-3; para. 0022);
- a conveying device (extending from belts 2a, 2b to belt 13; figs. 1-3; paras. 0022, 0035) adapted to convey in a direction of conveyance said at least one fiber web from one or more output belts (belts 2a, 2b; figs. 1-3; para. 0022) of said fiber web forming device to an input belt (intake belt 13; figs. 1-3; para. 0035) of a cross lapper (fleece laying machine 5 configured to perform a cross-lapping deposition of nonwoven webs; figs. 1-3; paras. 0013, 0022);
- said cross-lapper (fleece laying machine 5; figs. 1-3) adapted to produce lapping (paras. 0013, 0022) by a to-and-fro movement of a fiber lapper carriage (a laying carriage of the fleece laying machine 5 carries out a reciprocating movement; paras. 0013, 0039) for obtaining said fiber mat consisting of a stack of sections of the at least one fiber web transverse to each other (a multi-layered nonwoven web; abstract; para. 0007); and
- said conveying device comprising a drafting roller (rollers 8a, 8b, configured for a cyclic drafting by cyclically accelerating roller 8a or cyclic braking roller 8b; figs. 1-3; paras. 0022, 0024, 0026, 0036-0037, 0039), an outer surface thereof forming a driving surface (see figs. 1, 3 and annotated fig. 2) adapted to be in contact with said at least one fiber web (see figs. 1, 3 and annotated fig. 2), said drafting roller being located between the fiber web-forming device and the cross-lapper (figs. 1-3) and being configured to have a speed that varies as a function of a drafting force to be imparted to the web (cyclically accelerating roller 8a or cyclic braking roller 8b; figs. 1-3; paras. 0026, 0036-0037) so as to vary drafting of the at least one fiber web (paras. 0008, 0022, 0036-0037, 0039; claim 13) to control a pre-determined profile of the fiber mat outputted from said cross-lapper (figs. 1-3; abstract; para. 0028).
PNG
media_image1.png
588
970
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 from US 2003/0033691 A1
Bernhardt does not disclose wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface. However, Collotte, in an analogous art, teaches an apparatus for forming a fibre mat (an installation for forming a condensed nonwoven web; fig. 1; para. 0020) comprising a fibre web-forming device (carding machine 1; fig. 1; para. 0020) configured to form at least one fibre web (nonwoven webs W1, W2; figs. 1-2; para. 0020), and a drafting roller (rotating transfer cylinder 21 also configured for drafting; fig. 1; paras. 0026, 0029-0030), the fibre web-forming device comprising at least one output belt (belts B, B'; figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0024) configured to output said at least one fibre web (figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0025), wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device (internal vacuum tube 22 connected with suction sector A; figs. 1-2; para. 0027) configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface (suction is created inside suction sector A allowing the admission of a flow of air from the outside towards the inside of the cylinder 21, thereby holding at least one web W1 against the drive surface by suction; figs. 1-2; para. 0027). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus as disclosed by Bernhardt, with wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said drive surface, as taught by Collotte, in order to ensure that the at least one fiber web is held to the drive surface, thereby facilitating the drafting the at least one fiber web by the drafting roller.
Regarding claim 10, Bernhardt and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Bernhardt does not explicitly disclose wherein the suction device is adapted to maintain a thickness of the at least one fiber web at the driving surface not less than 50% of the thickness of the at least one web directly upstream of the drafting roller. However, the at least one fiber web inherently has a thickness at a location where it passes over the driving surface and also inherently has a thickness directly upstream of the drafting roller. Further, the above limitation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus. In addition, one of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that, it is undesirable to suction the at least one web against the driving surface with a high suction magnitude and cause a significant reduction of the thickness of the at least one web as such would negatively influence drafting and transport of the at least one web between the web forming machine and the cross-lapper. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the suction device as disclosed by Bernhardt when in use, with the suction device being capable of generating a suitable suction power to meet the claimed requirements, in order to support a mechanical compression of the nonwoven web and not to hamper drafting and transporting the at least one web (Bernhardt; para. 0033). Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
Regarding claim 11, Bernhardt and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, except for wherein the suction device is arranged to create, for a total area density of at least one fiber web of between 20 and 100 g/m², a negative pressure of between 10 millibars and 100 millibars. However, the above limitation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus. In addition, one of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that the magnitude of suction is not the only parameter determining a density of a carded web; instead, both the type of material and carding influence a total area density of a web. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the suction device as disclosed by Bernhardt, with the suction device being capable of generating a suitable suction power to meet the claimed requirements, in order to support a mechanical compression of the nonwoven web and simultaneously not to hamper drafting and transporting the at least one web (Bernhardt; para. 0033). Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
Regarding claim 12, Bernhardt and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Bernhardt further discloses wherein the one or more output belts of the fiber of the web-forming device comprises an upper output belt (belt 2a; figs. 1-3; para. 0022) for an upper fiber web (figs. 1-3; para. 0022) and a lower output belt (belt 2b; figs. 1-3; para. 0022) for a lower fiber web (figs. 1-3; para. 0022), the upper output belt and lower output belt configured to output the upper fiber web and lower fiber web to come together at the drafting roller (figs. 1-3; para. 0023).
Regarding claim 13, Bernhardt discloses the apparatus of claim 1, except for wherein said drafting roller is adapted to have a linear peripheral, or tangential, speed that varies over a speed range of between 100 and 150% of a speed of said one or more output belts of the web forming device. However, the above limitation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus as disclosed by Bernhardt, the relative speeds of the drive component and an output belt or output belts of the web forming device, in order to obtain a desired drafting ratio. Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
Regarding claim 14, Bernhardt discloses the apparatus of claim 1, except for said input belt of said cross lapper is adapted to have a speed equal to a peripheral speed of the drafting roller. However, the above limitation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus as disclosed by Bernhardt, the relative speeds of the drive component and an input belt (intake belt 13; figs. 1-3; para. 0035) of said cross lapper, in order to provide a steady flow of the at least one web to the cross-lapper without graduation accumulation between the drafting roller and the cross-lapper. Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
Regarding claim 15, Bernhardt discloses the apparatus of claim 10, and further discloses wherein said input belt of said cross lapper (intake belt 13; figs. 1-3; para. 0035) is adapted to drive the at least one fiber web at a speed 1 to 10% greater than that of the drafting roller (as the speed at which the nonwoven web is received by the fleece laying machine 5 is higher than the constant speed at which the nonwoven web enters the drawing equipment 3; paras. 0039, 0041).
Regarding claim 17, Bernhardt and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the drafting force is applied between from said one or more output belts of said fiber web forming device and said drafting roller (see figs. 1-3; para. 0026).
Regarding claim 18, Bernhardt discloses an apparatus for forming a fiber mat (figs. 1-3; paras. 0008, 0022; claim 13), in particular a non-woven mat (abstract; paras. 0008, 0022, 0040), comprising:
- a fiber web-forming device (carding machine 1; figs. 1-3; para. 0022) adapted to form at least one fiber web (figs. 1-3; para. 0022);
- a conveying device (extending from belts 2a, 2b to belt 13; figs. 1-3; paras. 0022, 0035) adapted to convey in a direction of conveyance said at least one fiber web from one or more output belts of said fiber web forming device (belts 2a, 2b; figs. 1-3; para. 0022) to an input belt (intake belt 13; figs. 1-3; para. 0035) of a cross lapper (fleece laying machine 5 configured to perform a cross-lapping deposition of nonwoven webs; figs. 1-3; paras. 0013, 0022);
- said cross-lapper (fleece laying machine 5; figs. 1-3) adapted to produce lapping (paras. 0013, 0022) by a to-and-fro movement of a lapper carriage (a laying carriage of the fleece laying machine 5 carries out a reciprocating movement; paras. 0013, 0039) for obtaining said fiber mat consisting of a stack of sections of the at least one fiber web transverse to each other (a multi-layered nonwoven web; abstract; para. 0007); and
- said conveying device comprising a drafting element (a multi-layered nonwoven web; abstract; para. 0007), an outer surface thereof forming a driving surface (see figs. 1, 3 and annotated fig. 2) adapted to be in contact with said at least one fiber web (see figs. 1, 3 and annotated fig. 2), said drafting element being located between the fiber web-forming device and the cross-lapper (figs. 1-3) and being configured to have a speed that varies as a function of the drafting that is desired to impart to the web (cyclically accelerating roller 8a or cyclic braking roller 8b; figs. 1-3; paras. 0026, 0036-0037) so as to vary drafting of the at least one fiber web (paras. 0008, 0022, 0036-0037, 0039; claim 13) to control a pre-determined profile of the fiber mat outputted from said cross-lapper (figs. 1-3; abstract; para. 0028);
Bernhardt does not disclose wherein said apparatus comprises a suction device configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface, said suction device and said drafting element outer surface being configured to be on an upper side of said at least one fiber web. However, Collotte, in an analogous art, teaches an apparatus for forming a fibre mat (an installation for forming a condensed nonwoven web; fig. 1; para. 0020) comprising a fibre web-forming device (carding machine 1; fig. 1; para. 0020) configured to form at least one fibre web (nonwoven webs W1, W2; figs. 1-2; para. 0020), and a drafting roller (rotating transfer cylinder 20 also configured for drafting; fig. 1; paras. 0026, 0029-0030), the fibre web-forming device comprising at least one output belt (belts B, B'; figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0024) configured to output said at least one fibre web (figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0025), wherein a suction device (tube 22 with internal partial vacuum connected with suction sector A; figs. 1-2; para. 0027) is provided to produce suction at a drive surface of a drafting device (draft roller 21; figs. 1-2; para. 0027) to hold at least one fibre web by suction against the drive surface (suction is created inside suction sector A allowing the admission of a flow of air from the outside towards the inside of the cylinder 21, thereby holding at least one web W1 against the drive surface by suction; figs. 1-2; para. 0027), said suction device and said drafting element outer surface being configured to be on an upper side of said at least one fiber web (figs. 1-2; para. 0027). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus as disclosed by Bernhardt, with wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said drive surface, said suction device and said drafting element outer surface being configured to be on an upper side of said at least one fiber web as taught by Collotte, in order to ensure that the at least one fiber web is held to the driving surface, thereby facilitating the drafting the at least one fiber web by the drafting roller.
Claims 1-2, 5-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dilo (DE 10356074 A1) in view of Collotte (US 2003/0061686 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Dilo discloses an apparatus for forming a fibre mat (fig. 1; see English translation; paras. 0011, 0015), comprising:
- a fiber web-forming device (a carding machine 1; fig. 1; para. 0015) adapted to form at least one fiber web (fig. 1; para. 0015);
- a conveying device (extending from belts 4a, 4b to a cross-layer; fig. 1; paras. 0007, 0009, 0015) adapted to convey in a direction of conveyance said at least one fiber web from one or more output belts (belts 4a, 4b; fig. 1; para. 0015) of said fiber web forming device to an input belt of a cross lapper (a cross-layer generally having an input belt; fig. 1; paras. 0007, 0009);
said conveying device comprising a drafting roller (disc rollers 8; figs. 1-2; paras. 0017-0018), an outer surface (an outer surface of the left disc roller 8; see annotated fig. 1) thereof forming a driving surface (see annotated fig. 1) adapted to be in contact with said at least one fiber web (see annotated fig. 1; paras. 0020-0021), said drafting roller being located between the fiber web-forming device (fig. 1) and the cross lapper (after spreading device 200; not in fig. 1; paras. 0007, 0009, 0022) and being configured to have a speed that varies as a function of a drafting force to be imparted to the web (the speed of disc rollers 8 being adjustable and synchronized with the speed at which the web is fed or drawn, therefore being variable as a function of a drafting force to be imparted to the web; fig. 1; paras. 0020-0021) so as to vary drafting of the at least one fiber web (fig. 1; paras. 0020-0021) to control a pre-determined profile of the fiber mat (fig. 1; para. 0009).
PNG
media_image2.png
696
1067
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 from DE 10356074 A1
Dilo, in this embodiment, does not explicitly disclose the apparatus comprising a cross-lapper, the cross-lapper adapted to produce lapping by a to-and-fro movement of a lapper carriage for obtaining said fibre mat consisting of a stack of sections of the at least one fibre web transverse to each other, wherein the conveying device is adapted to convey said at least one fiber web to an input belt of the cross lapper, and the drafting roller is located between the fiber web-forming device and the cross-lapper. However, Dilo does disclose that the apparatus may comprise a cross-lapper after spreader 200 (fig. 1; paras. 0007, 0009). One of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that a cross-lapper is adapted to produce lapping by a to-and-fro movement of a lapper carriage for obtaining said fiber mat consisting of a stack of sections of the at least one fiber web transverse to each other, and a cross-lapper generally comprises an input belt. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed by Dilo in this embodiment, with the apparatus further comprising a cross-lapper, the apparatus comprising a cross-lapper, the cross-lapper adapted to produce lapping by a to-and-fro movement of a lapper carriage for obtaining said fibre mat consisting of a stack of sections of the at least one fibre web transverse to each other, wherein the conveying device is adapted to convey said at least one fiber web to an input belt of the cross lapper, and the drafting roller is located between the fiber web-forming device and the cross-lapper, in order to use the apparatus to form a desire nonwoven web product which is cross-laid (Dilo; para. 0009).
Dilo does not disclose wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device configured to produce suction configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface. However, Collotte, in an analogous art, teaches an apparatus for forming a fibre mat (an installation for forming a condensed nonwoven web; fig. 1; para. 0020) comprising a fibre web-forming device (carding machine 1; fig. 1; para. 0020) configured to form at least one fibre web (nonwoven webs W1, W2; figs. 1-2; para. 0020), and a drafting roller (rotating transfer cylinder 20 also configured for drafting; fig. 1; paras. 0026, 0029-0030), the fibre web-forming device comprising at least one output belt (belts B, B'; figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0024) configured to output said at least one fibre web (figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0025), and a drafting roller (rotating transfer cylinder 21 also configured for drafting; fig. 1; paras. 0026, 0029-0030), the fibre web-forming device comprising at least one output belt (belts B, B'; figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0024) configured to output said at least one fibre web (figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0025), wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device (internal vacuum tube 22 connected with suction sector A; figs. 1-2; para. 0027) configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface (suction is created inside suction sector A allowing the admission of a flow of air from the outside towards the inside of the cylinder 21, thereby holding at least one web W1 against the drive surface by suction; figs. 1-2; para. 0027). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus as disclosed by Dilo, with wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device configured to produce suction configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface, as taught by Collotte, in order to ensure that the at least one fiber web is held to the drive surface, thereby facilitating the drafting the at least one fiber web by the drafting roller.
Regarding claim 2, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Dilo further discloses the apparatus further comprising a path between the web-forming device and the cross-lapper for the at least one fiber web to follow, said path including at least one inflexion point (see annotated fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Dilo further discloses wherein the one or more output belts of the fiber web-forming device comprises an upper output belt (belt 4a; fig. 1; para. 0015) for an upper fiber web (web 3a; fig. 1; para. 0015) and a lower output belt (belt 4b; fig. 1; para. 0015) for a lower fiber web (web 3b; fig. 1; para. 0015), the upper output belt and lower output belt configured to output the upper fiber web and lower fiber web to come together at the drafting roller (fig. 1; para. 0015).
Regarding claim 6, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claims 5, and Dilo further discloses wherein the drafting roller is positioned downstream of a guide roller (see annotated fig. 1) for each of the two output belts to limit a distance over which the drafting force between the guide roller of a respective belt of the two output belts and the drafting roller is applied (see annotated fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 6, except for wherein the drafting roller is disposed at a distance from the guide roller of each of the two output belts of between 50 mm and 300 mm. However, Dilo, in Fig. 1 does show that the draft roller is disposed at a distance from a guide roller of belt 4a, 4b (see annotated fig. 1). Dilo has disclosed the general conditions of the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured a distance between the drafting roller and the guide roller of each belt as disclosed by Dilo as claimed, since the claimed values are merely an optimum or workable range. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 8, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 6, except for wherein a space between the upper output belt guide roller of the web-forming device and the drafting roller is between 5 and 20 mm, for a web area density of between 10 and 50 g/m². However, Dilo has disclosed the general conditions of the claimed invention. In addition, one of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that the space between a drafting roller and an output belt guide roller is determined by many factors, such as an overall size of the apparatus, a length of each belt, the thickness and density of the nonwoven web and the power level provided to the apparatus, etc. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured a space between the drafting roller and the upper output belt guide roller as disclosed by Dilo as claimed, since the claimed values are merely an optimum or workable range. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 9, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 6, except for wherein a space between the lower output belt guide roller of the web-forming device and the drafting roller is between 10 and 30 mm, for a web area density of between 10 and 50 g/m². However, Dilo has disclosed the general conditions of the claimed invention. In addition, one of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that a space between a drafting roller and an output belt guide roller is determined by many factors, such as an overall size of the apparatus, a length of each belt, the thickness and density of the nonwoven web and the power level provided to the apparatus, etc. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured a space between the drafting roller and the lower output belt guide roller as disclosed by Dilo as claimed, since the claimed values are merely an optimum or workable range. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 10, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and the at least one web inherently has a thickness where it passes over the drive surface and a thickness directly upstream of the drive component.
Dilo does not explicitly disclose wherein the suction device is adapted to maintain a thickness of the at least one fiber web at the drive surface not less than 50% of the thickness of the at least one web directly upstream of the drive component. However, the above limitation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus. In addition, one of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that, it is undesirable to suction the at least one web against the drive surface with a high suction magnitude and cause a significant reduction of the thickness of the at least one web as such would negatively influence drafting and transport of the at least one web between the web forming machine and the cross-lapper. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the suction device, with the suction device being capable of generating a suitable suction power to meet the claimed requirements, in order to hold the nonwoven web to the draft roller and simultaneously not to hamper drafting and transporting the at least one web. Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
Regarding claim 11, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, except for wherein the suction device is arranged to create, for a total area density of the at least one fiber web of between 20 and 100 g/m² a negative pressure of between 10 millibars and 100 millibars. However, the above limitation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus. In addition, one of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that the magnitude of suction is not the only parameter determining a density of a carded web; instead, both the type of material and carding influence a total area density of a web. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the suction device, with the suction device being capable of generating a suitable suction power to meet the claimed requirements, in order to in order to hold the nonwoven web to the draft roller and simultaneously not to hamper drafting and transporting the at least one web. Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
Regarding claim 12, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Dilo further discloses wherein the one or more output belts of the fiber web-forming device comprises an upper output belt (belt 4a; fig. 1; para. 0015) for an upper fiber web (web 3a; fig. 1; para. 0015) and a lower output belt (belt 4b; fig. 1; para. 0015) for a lower fiber web (web 3b; fig. 1; para. 0015), the upper output belt and lower output belt configured to output the upper fiber web and lower fiber web to come together at the drive component (fig. 1; para. 0015).
Regarding claim 13, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Dilo further discloses wherein said drafting roller is adapted to have a linear peripheral, or tangential, speed that varies over a speed range of between 100 and 150% of the speed of said one or more output belts of the web forming device (the peripheral speed of the disc rollers 8 are synchronized with or deviating upwards from the feed speed of the web; fig. 1; paras. 0020-0021). In addition, it is noted that the above limitation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus.
Regarding claim 14, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, except for said input belt of said cross lapper is adapted to have a speed equal to a peripheral speed of the drafting roller. However, the above limitation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus. In addition, Dilo discloses that the drafting roller 8 is at a speed synchronized with the speed at which the at least one web passing a spreader 200 before the cross-lapper (fig. 1; para. 0020). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus as disclosed by Dilo, with suitable relative speeds of the drafting roller and an input belt of said cross lapper, in order to provide a steady flow of the at least one web to the cross-lapper without graduation accumulation between the drafting device and the cross-lapper. Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
Regarding claim 15, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, except for wherein the input belt of the cross-lapper is adapted to drive the at least one fiber web at a speed slightly higher than that of the drafting roller. However, one of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that it has been a common practice for a cross-lapper to have an input belt configured for driving a web at a speed. In addition, a speed arrangement in operation does not provide any structural feature to the apparatus. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus as disclosed by Dilo, with suitable relative speeds of the drafting roller and an input belt of said cross lapper, in order to provide a steady flow of the at least one web to the cross-lapper without graduation accumulation between the drafting device and the cross-lapper. Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
Regarding claim 17, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Dilo further discloses wherein the drafting section extends from said one or more output belts of said fiber web forming device (when the disc roller 8 is driven at a faster speed than a feed speed of the fibrous web; fig. 1; paras. 0020-0021).
Regarding claim 18, Dilo discloses an apparatus for forming a fibre mat (fig. 1; see English translation; paras. 0011, 0015), in particular a non-woven mat, comprising:
- a fiber web-forming device (a carding machine 1; fig. 1; para. 0015) adapted to form at least one fiber web (fig. 1; para. 0015);
- a conveying device (extending from belts 4a, 4b to a cross-layer; fig. 1; paras. 0007, 0009, 0015) adapted to convey in a direction of conveyance said at least one fiber web from one or more output belts (belts 4a, 4b; fig. 1; para. 0015) of said fiber web forming device to an input belt of a cross lapper (a cross-layer generally having an input belt; fig. 1; para. 0007, 0009); and
- said conveying device comprising a drafting element (disc rollers 8; figs. 1-2; paras. 0017-0018), an outer surface (an outer surface of the left disc roller 8; see annotated fig. 1) thereof forming a driving surface (see annotated fig. 1) adapted to be in contact with said at least one fiber web (see annotated fig. 1; paras. 0020-0021), said drafting element being located between the fiber web-forming device (fig. 1) and the cross-lapper (after spreading device 200; not in fig. 1; paras. 0007, 0009, 0022) and being configured to have a speed that varies as a function of the drafting that is desired to impart to the web (the speed of disc rollers 8 being adjustable and synchronized with the speed at which the web is fed or drawn, therefore being variable as a function of a drafting force to be imparted to the web; fig. 1; paras. 0020-0021) so as to vary drafting of the at least one fiber web (fig. 1; paras. 0020-0021) to control a pre-determined profile of the fiber mat outputted from said cross-lapper (fig. 1; para. 0009).
Dilo, in this embodiment, does not explicitly disclose the apparatus comprising a cross-lapper, the cross-lapper adapted to produce lapping by a to-and-fro movement of a lapper carriage for obtaining said fibre mat consisting of a stack of sections of the at least one fibre web transverse to each other, wherein the conveying device is adapted to convey said at least one fiber web to an input belt of the cross lapper, and the drafting roller is located between the fiber web-forming device and the cross-lapper. However, Dilo does disclose that the apparatus may comprise a cross-lapper after spreader 200 (fig. 1; paras. 0007, 0009). One of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that a cross-lapper is adapted to produce lapping by a to-and-fro movement of a lapper carriage for obtaining said fiber mat consisting of a stack of sections of the at least one fiber web transverse to each other, and a cross-lapper generally comprises an input belt. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed by Dilo in this embodiment, with the apparatus further comprising a cross-lapper, the apparatus comprising a cross-lapper, the cross-lapper adapted to produce lapping by a to-and-fro movement of a lapper carriage for obtaining said fibre mat consisting of a stack of sections of the at least one fibre web transverse to each other, wherein the conveying device is adapted to convey said at least one fiber web to an input belt of the cross lapper, and the drafting roller is located between the fiber web-forming device and the cross-lapper, in order to use the apparatus to form a desire nonwoven web product which is cross-laid (Dilo; para. 0009).
Dilo does not disclose wherein said apparatus comprises a suction device configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface, said suction device and said drafting element outer surface being configured to be on an upper side of said at least one fiber web. However, Collotte, in an analogous art, teaches an apparatus for forming a fibre mat (an installation for forming a condensed nonwoven web; fig. 1; para. 0020) comprising a fibre web-forming device (carding machine 1; fig. 1; para. 0020) configured to form at least one fibre web (nonwoven webs W1, W2; figs. 1-2; para. 0020), and a drafting roller (rotating transfer cylinder 20 also configured for drafting; fig. 1; paras. 0026, 0029-0030), the fibre web-forming device comprising at least one output belt (belts B, B'; figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0024) configured to output said at least one fibre web (figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0025), and a drafting roller (rotating transfer cylinder 21 also configured for drafting; fig. 1; paras. 0026, 0029-0030), the fibre web-forming device comprising at least one output belt (belts B, B'; figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0024) configured to output said at least one fibre web (figs. 1-2; paras. 0023-0025), wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device (internal vacuum tube 22 connected with suction sector A; figs. 1-2; para. 0027) configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface (suction is created inside suction sector A allowing the admission of a flow of air from the outside towards the inside of the cylinder 21, thereby holding at least one web W1 against the drive surface by suction; figs. 1-2; para. 0027). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus as disclosed by Dilo, with wherein said drafting roller comprises a suction device configured to produce suction configured to produce suction to hold said at least one fiber web by suction against said driving surface, as taught by Collotte, in order to ensure that the at least one fiber web is held to the drive surface, thereby facilitating the drafting the at least one fiber web by the drafting roller. By this combination, said suction device and said outer surface of said drafting element outer surface would be configured to be on an upper side of said at least one fiber web (see annotated fig. 1).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Dilo (DE 10356074 A1) and Collotte (US 2003/0061686 A1) and further in view of Gaudino (US 4,461,058 A).
Regarding claim 4, Dilo and Collotte, in combination, disclose the apparatus of claim 1. Dilo does not disclose wherein the drafting roller is covered with a sleeve in a material adapted to provide improved adhesion to the at least one fiber web. However, Gaudino, in an analogous art, teaches wherein a draft roller is covered with a sleeve in a material adapted to provide good adhesion to an item being drafted (a roller of a draft device having a covering of hard rubber; col. 2, ll. 66-67; col. 3, ll. 1-2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed by Bernhardt, with wherein the drafting roller is covered with a sleeve in a material adapted to provide good adhesion to the at least one fibre web, as taught by Gaudino, in order to provide good friction between the draft roller and the web to facilitate effective drafting.
Response to Arguments
In view of Applicant's amendment, newly modified grounds of rejection have been identified and applied as necessitated by the amendment. Applicant's arguments about prior art rejections are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. Applicant's other arguments are addressed as follows.
Applicant's remarks: with respect to the claimed "suction device", Applicant asserts that: 1) the Election of Species was drawn along the lines of the number and structure of the output belts and their orientations to one another and the like, and 2) the Office never asked applicant to limit Species amongst whether or not a suction was applied at a drafting roller.
Examiner's response: Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is noted that an election of Species is an election of an entire embodiment, not a specific feature of an embodiment. An election requirement does not necessarily list all the distinct features, because a single distinct feature is sufficient to separate the species from other species. In addition, the Office does not question whether the original disclosure provides support for a suction device in the elected apparatus. The issue is that claim 1 has been amended to recite "said drafting roller comprises a suction device", and the scope of "drafting roller" is significantly narrower than that of the "apparatus". The original disclosure only states "the system can also be improved by arranging that roller 10 employs suction" in the elected Fig. 1, which even does not indicate that the roller 10 comprises a suction device. The fact is that, even if a suction device is included in the apparatus, the suction device is not necessarily included in the drafting roller. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a suction device (e.g., a fan as mentioned in non-elected Species 2) is generally arranged to be external to a roller in practice. In this case, as the original disclosure does not provide any basis for the drafting roller including a suction device, the examiner's position is maintained.
Applicant's remarks: with respect to Dilo, Applicant asserts that Dilo employs drafting discs, there is no substantial peripheral radial surface through which to apply suction because discs are simply plate-like structures, and, it would not at all be obvious to add suction to the driving surface (distal radial edge) of such a disc/plate.
Examiner's response: Examiner respectfully disagrees. Suction does not have to be applied through peripheral radial surface of a drafting roller, which is not in the original disclosure or the claims either. Dilo's drafting rollers 8 each consist of a plurality of discs 10 arranged parallel to one another on a common shaft 9 and spaced apart from one another by a distance (fig. 2; para. 0017). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that an internal vacuum tube can be easily combined with the shaft 9 in a Dilo's drafting roller 8, especially when in view of Collotte. Therefore, Applicant's argument is not found persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIYING ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3326. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am - 4:30 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, KHOA HUYNH can be reached on (571)272-4888. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AIYING ZHAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights