Detailed Office Action
The communication dated 3/27/2024 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1-15 are pending.
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 .
Claim Interpretation
Steps (c) and (e) state that the treatments occur on “at least one of the plurality of individual fibers and plurality of fiber bundles”. This step can read on before or after step (b) as currently claimed. This interpretation is supported in light of instant paragraph [0019]. If the applicant wants the claim to read on after step b) the claims should be written as “c) moistening the planar laid fibrous structure” and “(e) heating the planar laid fibrous structure”.
The Examiner also notes that steps c) and e) can occur in any order or simultaneously as claimed.
The Examiner interprets the term “fluid” as reading on a liquid or gas.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-15 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “low water” in claims 1, 9, and 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “low-water” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purpose of examination the Examiner interprets “low-water” to read on any dry processing (dry shredding, dry grinding), any process wherein the water present is just water bound to the fiber, or any process wherein the consistency is over 50% (more than a pressing consistency).
Claims 2-8 depend from claim 1 and are similarly rejected.
Claims 10-15 depend from claim 1 and are similarly rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-6 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2016/0221214 MONBETSU et al., hereinafter MONBETSU.
As for claims 1, 9, and 10, MONBETSU discloses shredding unit (12) and defibering unit (14) to break up sheets of paper from supply unit (10) [0033-0036] into fibers with dry defibration [0037-0038].
The fibers are blown in air with blower (56) in pipe (54) into an accumulation unit (60) wherein the fibers are dropped onto dry web formation unit (70) [0047-0048 and Figure 1] to form a web from the fibers on mesh belt (72) [0052], a planar laid fibrous structure (W).
The fibers as part of the planar laid fibrous structure are moistened and heated via unit (78) which supplies water as steam [0055 and Figure 1]. The heater could also be interpreted as the first set of roller (86) of binding unit (82) [0057 and Figure 1].
The second set of rollers of binding unit (84) solidifies the planar fibrous web (W) forming a sheet (S) [0057] in a press nip between the two rollers.
As for claims 2 and 11, MONBETSU discloses the moistening unit (78) can use steam or water both of which are water [0055].
As for claims 3, 4, 12, and 13, the heating can be partially done by the first set of rollers (86), a heated contact surface, as part of binding unit (82) prior to binding unit (84) [0057 and Figure 1].
As for claims 5, 6, and 14, steam of the moistening unit (78) is preheated water [0055; i.e. liquid water is turned into steam by heating].
As for claim 15, the heating unit is connected to the dry forming unit (102) as part of the steam moistener (78) or first set of heated rollers (86) [Figure 1].
Claims 1-4, 9-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2018/0021976 NAKAMURA, hereinafter NAKAMURA
As for claims 1, 9, and 10, NAKAMURA discloses taking shredding unit (12) and defibering unit (20) to break up sheets of paper from supply unit (10) [0042-0044] into fibers with dry defibration [0047-0048].
The fibers are blown in air with blower (56) in pipe (54) into an accumulation unit (60) wherein the fibers are dropped onto dry web formation unit (70) [0060 and Figure 1] to form a web from the fibers on mesh belt (72) [0061], a planar laid fibrous structure (W).
The fibers as part of the planar laid fibrous structure are moistened via unit (78) which supplies water or as water vapor [0064 and Figure 1]. The fibers can be heated via gases (G1)/(G2) prior to formation in unit (60) [0075]. The heater could also be interpreted as the first set of roller (86) of binding unit (82) [0066 and Figure 1].
The second set of rollers of binding unit (84) solidifies the planar fibrous web (W) forming a sheet (S) [0066] in a press nip between the two rollers.
As for claims 2 and 11, NAKAMURA discloses the moistening unit (78) can use water vapor team or water both of which are water [0064].
As for claims 3, 4, 12, and 13, the heating can be partially done by the first set of rollers (86), a heated contact surface, as part of binding unit (82) prior to binding unit (84) [0066 and Figure 1].
As for claim 15, the fibers can be heated via gases (G1)/(G2) prior to formation in unit (60) [0075] or first set of heated rollers (86) [Figure 1].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 2018/0021976 NAKAMURA, hereinafter NAKAMURA.
As for claim 7, NAKAMURA discloses that gas (G2) has a temperature of 10 to 40 degrees C which overlaps the instant claimed range making a prima facie case of obviousness [0075]. NAKAMURA also discloses gas (G1) has a temperature of 10 to 80 degrees C which overlaps the instant claimed range making a prima facie case of obviousness [0075].
A prima facie case of obviousness is established when a claimed narrow range is within a broad prior art range or partially overlaps or touches the broad range.
Harris, 409 F.3d at 1341; Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1329-30
As for claim 8, NAKAMURA discloses gas (G1) has a temperature of 10 to 80 degrees C which overlaps the instant claimed range making a prima facie case of obviousness [0075].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY J CALANDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:45 AM -4:15 PM.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571)270-7457. 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.
ANTHONY J. CALANDRA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1748
/Anthony Calandra/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748