Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/564,861

COMPRESSION MOULDING TOOL AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A FIBROUS PULP TRAY USING THE TOOL

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Nov 28, 2023
Examiner
NGUON, VIRAK
Art Unit
1741
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Rottneros Packaging AB
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
327 granted / 394 resolved
+18.0% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
419
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§112
30.9%
-9.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 394 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Response to Amendment The Amendment filed 1/08/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 10 and 14 have been amended; and claims 11-12 have been canceled. Claims 1-9 were previously indicated as allowable. Applicant’s amendment to the Claims have overcome each and every objection and 112b rejection set forth in the non-Final Office action previously mailed on 10/21/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 10 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wnek (US 2011/0227250 A1). Regarding claim 10, Wnek teaches a fibrous pulp tray (Figure 1; paragraph 0021, container 2 is generally a tray; paragraphs 0023, 0045-0046, During formation of the container 2 from a flat blank, the paperboard can overlap at the corners 4, 6, 8, 10 so as to cause the accumulation of excess paperboard into folds or pleats; hence, container 2 is formed formed from paperboard (i.e., fibrous pulp) comprising a floor portion (24), sidewalls extending from the floor portion (26, 28, 30, 32), and a flanqe extendinq horizontally from an upper portion of the sidewalls (36 in Figures 1-2); wherein the outside of the tray comprises a plurality of protrusions located on an outer surface of a sidewall adjacent to the flanqe (40 in Figures 2-4), the protrusions being an integral part of the tray (Figure 2, portion 40 forms part of container 2), and wherein the inside of the tray at the locations of the protrusions is free from macroscopic surface features (Figure 6, inside of container at location of portion 40 is smooth; is consistent with what Applicant considers ‘free from macroscopic surface features’ as evidenced by paragraphs 0010-0012, 0043 of the published application (the smooth inner surface of the tray is a result of the male mould element which is free from macroscopic features… the inner surface at the location of the outside protrusion is undistinguishable from other portions of the inner surface, at least from a visual inspection; Features arising from the inherent surface roughness of the male mould element or from wear and tear are considered to be microscopic features). Regarding claim 13, Wnek further discloses the sidewalls are sloped outwards (as shown in Figures 3-4). Regarding claim 14, Wnek further discloses the sidewalls and protrusions are configured such that a plurality of trays are stackable and such that a distance between two stacked trays is defined by the plurality of protrusions (Figures 1-4, showing the sidewalls being sloped outwards and inner surface of container at location of portion 40 being smooth; hence, sidewalls and portions (i.e., protrusions) are configured to allow a plurality of trays to be stackable with a distance between trays being defined by portion 40). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-9 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 1 is allowable for requiring: ““…A compression moulding tool for manufacturing a fibrous pulp tray having a floor portion and walls extending from the floor portion, the tool comprising: a first female mould element having a floor and sidewalls, the first female mould element comprising a plurality of first recessed portions, each first recessed portion having a first volume; a water permeable filter arranged in the first female mould element and configured to follow the surface of the female mould element, the water permeable filter being configured to retain pulp fibers; a second female mould element having a floor and sidewalls corresponding to the first female mould element, the second female mould element comprising a plurality of second recessed portions at locations corresponding to the first recessed portions of the first female mould element, each second recessed portion having a second volume smaller than the first volume, wherein the second recessed portions are configured to form corresponding protrusions at an outer surface of the fibrous pulp tray; and at least one male mould element configured to press against the first and second female mould element[s] to compress a fibrous pulp product located therebetween, the male mould element having a surface profile at locations corresponding to the first and second recessed portions of the first and second female mould which is free from macroscopic features.” with respect to claim 1; and “…depositing a fibrous pulp suspension in a first female mould element having a floor and sidewalls, the female mould comprising a plurality of first recessed portions, each first recessed portion having a first volume, and a water permeable filter configured to retain pulp fibers arranged in in the first female mould element and configured to follow the surface of the first female mould element; pressing a male mould element against the first female mould element to dewater the fibrous pulp suspension such that a fibrous pulp product is formed therebetween and such that fibrous pulp fills the plurality of first recessions, the male mould element having a surface profile free from macroscopic features at locations corresponding to the first recessed portions of the female mould; moving the fibrous pulp product from the first female mould element to a second female mould element, the second female mould element having a floor and sidewalls corresponding to the first female mould element, the second female mould comprising a plurality of second recessed portions at locations corresponding to the first recessed portions of the first female mould element, each second recessed portion having a second volume smaller than the first volume; pressing the male mould element against the second female mould element such that a fibrous pulp product is formed therebetween and such that the fibrous pulp product fills the plurality of second recessions, thereby forming a fibrous pulp product having a floor, sidewalls and protrusions corresponding to the second recessed portions of the second female mould element.” with respect to claim 6. The closest prior art, Wnek (US 2005/0109653 A1), discloses a compression molding tool (Figures 19-23) for manufacturing a tray (container 164; paragraph 0109), comprising: a first female mold element (forming die 170; paragraph 0109) having a floor and sidewalls (recess 196); a second female mold element (forming die 218; paragraph 0114) having a floor and sidewalls (recess 220) having a recessed portion (recess 228); and at least one male mold element (punch 168) configure to press against the first and second female mold elements. However, Wnek neither teaches nor suggest the first female mold element comprises a plurality of recessed portions; the at least one male mold element comprises a surface profile corresponding to the recessed portions; nor a water permeable filter contained therebetween. Further, Wnek does not disclose depositing a fibrous pulp suspension in the first female mold element; pressing the male mold element against the first female mold element to dewater the fibrous pulp suspension; moving the intermediate fibrous pulp product to the second mold element and pressing the male mold element against the second female mold element to fill the recessed portions and forming a fibrous pulp product. In fact, Wnek discloses the container is formed by punching a blank of material between the first and second female mold elements and the male mold element (paragraph 0109; Figures 19-23). Another prior art, Nilsson (US 2009/0142523 A1), teaches a molding tool (Figure 5) for manufacturing a tray (10), comprising: a first female mold element (tool 3) having a floor and sidewalls (as shown in Figure 5) having a recessed portion (Figure 5, outer edges of tool 5); and at least one male mold element (tool 1) configured to press against the first female mold element. Further, Nilsson discloses depositing a fibrous pulp suspension in the first female mold element; pressing the male mold element against the first female mold element to dewater the fibrous pulp suspension (Figure 5; paragraph 0040). However, Nilsson fails to teach or suggest a second female mold element having a corresponding recessed portion; nor a water permeable filter contained therebetween. In fact, Nilsson discloses the female and male elements comprises channels (27 in Figure 11) to allow water and air to permeate therebetween (paragraph 0045). Claims 2-9 are allowable at least for depending on claim 1. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Virak Nguon whose telephone number is (571)272-4196. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday (and alternate Fridays) 7:30-5:00. 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, Alison L Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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. /VIRAK NGUON/Examiner, Art Unit 1741 4/04/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 28, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Jan 08, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595208
NOVEL MASONRY MATERIAL UTILIZING RECYCLED CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589537
MOLD CLAMPING DEVICE AND INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589536
DIE CASTING DEVICE AND MOLDING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583158
ROTATION DEVICE FOR INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583990
FOOTWEAR COMPONENT MANUFACTURING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 394 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month