DETAILED ACTION
The communication dated 3/23/2026 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 1, 3, 5-11 are amended. Claim 4 is cancelled. Claims 12 and 13 are added.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that prior art, FLYNN, does not teach the amended moisture meter control configuration.
Applicant’s arguments, see REMARKS, filed 3/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of GORDEN (US 20210172121 A1).
Applicant argues that prior art, GORDEN does not teach the use of a moisture meter prior to the final paper location.
GORDEN teaches the control system is communicatively coupled to any other moisture sensor or other control or sensing device incorporated into the creping process [0080]. The Examiner notes the creping process would be before the sheeter and after humidification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FLYNN (US 20200283957 A1) in view of GORDEN (US 20210172121 A1).
For claim 1, FLYNN teaches a paper making system that deposits diluted fiber pulp to a moving wired mesh [0051]. This teaches the limitation of “A sheet manufacturing apparatus, comprising: a deposition portion configured to deposit a material containing a fiber to form a web; a web transport portion including a transport belt configured to hold and transport the web”. FLYNN teaches a sprayer system is used to apply additives as a sprayed slurry onto the wet web [0056]. The examiner notes to spray onto the web the sprayer must face the web. This teaches the limitation of “a humidifier provided to face the transport belt and configured to apply moisture to the web”. FLYNN then teaches the web is formed by pressing and heating on rollers [0053]. This teaches the limitation of “a sheet forming portion configured to perform at least one of heating and pressing on the web to which the moisture was applied”. FLYNN teaches a controller is used to control the sprayers (multiples-first and second) [0112]. This teaches the limitation of “and a controller, the humidifier including at least a first mist generation element and a second mist generation element, and the controller being configured to individually control the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element based on the moisture of the web measured by the moisture meter”.
Regarding the controls system, FLYNN teaches the use of a controller that changes the individual nozzle functions based on process variables [0112]. FLYNN is silent to the use of a sensor to measure variables for the spray controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN also teaches the use of moisture detecting spectrometer to analyze the paper moisture [0012]. GORDEN teaches the control system is communicatively coupled to any other moisture sensor or other control or sensing device incorporated into the creping process [0080]. The Examiner notes the creping process would be before the sheeter and after humidification. This teaches the limitation of “a moisture meter configured to measure moisture of the web, the moisture meter being arranged downstream relative to the humidifier and upstream relative to the sheet forming portion in a transport direction of the web”. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of FLYNN with the controls of GORDEN to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the coating as taught by GORDEN.
For claim 2, FLYNN teaches the sheet manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, as above. FLYNN teaches the use of sprayers with nozzles (exhaust port) and booms (duct) to spray the web [0055]. This teaches the limitation of “wherein the humidifier includes a duct and an exhaust port, and mist generated by at least one of the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element is exhausted from the exhaust port to the web through the duct”.
For claim 3, FLYNN teaches the sheet manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, as above. FLYNN teaches the use of a controller that changes the individual nozzle functions based on process variables [0112]. FLYNN is silent to the use of a sensor to measure variables for the spray controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. This teaches the limitation of “further comprising one or more sensors, wherein the controller is configured to control at least one of the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element further based on a result measured by the sensors. GORDEN teaches that the sensor and controller configuration improves the quality of the coating [0152]. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of FLYNN with the controls of GORDEN to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the coating as taught by GORDEN.
For claim 5, FLYNN teaches the sheet manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, as above. FLYNN teaches the use of a controller that changes the individual nozzle functions based on process variables [0112]. FLYNN is silent to the use of a sensor to measure variables for the spray controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN also teaches the use of temperature sensor [0073]. This teaches the limitation of “further comprising a temperature detector configured to measure temperature, wherein the controller is configured to individually control the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element further based on the temperature measured by the temperature detector”. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of FLYNN with the controls of GORDEN to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the coating as taught by GORDEN.
For claim 6, FLYNN teaches the sheet manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, as above. FLYNN teaches the use of a controller that changes the individual nozzle functions based on process variables [0112]. FLYNN is silent to the use of a sensor to measure variables for the spray controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN also teaches the use of humidity sensor to analyze the ambient moisture [0074]. This teaches the limitation of “further comprising a humidity detector configured to measure humidity, wherein the controller is configured to individually control the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element further based on the humidity measured by the humidity detector”. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of FLYNN with the controls of GORDEN to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the coating as taught by GORDEN.
For claim 7, FLYNN teaches the sheet manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, as above. FLYNN teaches the deposition rate of material (thickness) per sprayer nozzle [0112]. This teaches the limitation of “further comprising a thickness detector configured to measure a thickness of the web, wherein the controller is configured to individually control the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element further based on the thickness of the web measured by the thickness detector”.
For claim 8, FLYNN teaches the sheet manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, as above. FLYNN teaches the use of a controller that changes the individual nozzle functions based on process variables [0112]. FLYNN is silent to the use of a sensor to measure variables for the spray controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN also teaches the use of temperature sensor [0073]. This teaches the limitation of “further comprising a water temperature detector configured to measure water temperature of water stored in the humidifier and used for generating mist, wherein the controller is configured to individually control the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element further based on the water temperature measured by the water temperature detector. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of FLYNN with the controls of GORDEN to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the coating as taught by GORDEN.
For claim 9, FLYNN teaches a paper making system that deposits diluted fiber pulp to a moving wired mesh [0051]. This teaches the limitation of “A sheet manufacturing apparatus for manufacturing a sheet from a material containing a fiber, the sheet manufacturing apparatus comprising: a deposition portion configured to deposit a material containing the fiber to form a web; a web transport portion including a transport belt configured to hold and transport the web in a transport direction;”. FLYNN teaches a sprayer system is used to apply additives as a sprayed slurry onto the wet web [0056]. The examiner notes to spray onto the web the sprayer must face the web. This teaches the limitation of “a humidifier provided to face the transport belt and configured to apply moisture to the web;”. FLYNN then teaches the web is formed by pressing and heating on rollers [0053]. This teaches the limitation of “a sheet forming portion configured to perform at least one of heating and pressing on the web to which the moisture was applied”. FLYNN teaches a controller is used to control the sprayers (multiples-first and second) [0112]. The sprayers are arranged in a line [Fig 131]. This teaches the limitation of “and a controller, the humidifier including a plurality of mist generation elements arranged in line symmetry in a width direction of the web, and the controller being configured to individually control the plurality of mist generation elements in accordance with a condition corresponding to the line symmetry based on the moisture of the web measured by the moisture meter”.
Regarding the controls system, FLYNN teaches the use of a controller that changes the individual nozzle functions based on process variables [0112]. FLYNN is silent to the use of a sensor to measure variables for the spray controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN also teaches the use of moisture detecting spectrometer to analyze the paper moisture [0012]. GORDEN teaches the control system is communicatively coupled to any other moisture sensor or other control or sensing device incorporated into the creping process [0080]. The Examiner notes the creping process would be before the sheeter and after humidification. This teaches the limitation of “a moisture meter configured to measure moisture of the web, the moisture meter being arranged downstream relative to the humidifier and upstream relative to the sheet forming portion in a transport direction of the web”. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of FLYNN with the controls of GORDEN to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the coating as taught by GORDEN.
For claim 10, FLYNN teaches a paper making system that deposits diluted fiber pulp to a moving wired mesh that transfers the web [0051]. FLYNN teaches a sprayer system is used to apply additives as a sprayed slurry onto the wet web [0056]. The examiner notes to spray onto the web the sprayer must face the web. FLYNN teaches a controller is used to control the sprayers (multiples-first and second) [0112]. The sprayers are arranged in a line [Fig 131]. This teaches the limitation of “A sheet manufacturing apparatus for manufacturing a sheet from a material containing a fiber, including at least a first mist generation element and a second mist generation element, the sheet manufacturing method comprising: depositing a material containing a fiber to form a web; transporting the web; applying moisture to the web by a humidifier, the humidifier including at least one of the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element configured to be individually controlled”. FLYNN then teaches the web is formed by pressing and heating on rollers [0053]. This teaches the limitation of “applying, by the sheet forming portion at least one of heating and pressing to the web to which the moisture was applied”.
Regarding the controls system, FLYNN teaches the use of a controller that changes the individual nozzle functions based on process variables [0112]. FLYNN is silent to the use of a sensor to measure variables for the spray controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN teaches the control system is communicatively coupled to any other moisture sensor or other control or sensing device incorporated into the creping process [0080]. The Examiner notes the creping process would be before the sheeter and after humidification. This teaches the limitation of “measuring moisture of the web by a moisture meter; the moisture meter being arranged downstream relative to the humidifier and upstream relative to the sheet forming portion in a transport direction of the web and the at least one of the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element being configured to be individually controlled based on the moisture of the web measured by the moisture meter”. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of FLYNN with the controls of GORDEN to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the coating as taught by GORDEN.
For claim 11, FLYNN teaches a paper making system that deposits diluted fiber pulp to a moving wired mesh that transfers the web [0051]. FLYNN teaches a sprayer system is used to apply additives as a sprayed slurry onto the wet web [0056]. The examiner notes to spray onto the web the sprayer must face the web. FLYNN teaches a controller is used to control the sprayers (multiples-first and second) [0112]. The sprayers are arranged in a line [Fig 131]. This teaches the limitation of “A sheet manufacturing method for a sheet manufacturing apparatus including a plurality of mist generation elements arranged in line symmetry in a width direction of a web, the sheet manufacturing method comprising: depositing a material containing a fiber to form the web; transporting the web; applying moisture to the web by, a humidifier including the plurality of mist generation elements, the moisture being applied by individually controlling the plurality of mist generation elements in accordance with a condition corresponding to the line symmetry”. FLYNN then teaches the web is formed by pressing and heating on rollers [0053]. This teaches the limitation of “ applying, by the sheet forming portion, at least one of heating and pressing to the web to which the moisture was applied”.
Regarding the controls system, FLYNN teaches the use of a controller that changes the individual nozzle functions based on process variables [0112]. FLYNN is silent to the use of a sensor to measure variables for the spray controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN teaches the control system is communicatively coupled to any other moisture sensor or other control or sensing device incorporated into the creping process [0080]. The Examiner notes the creping process would be before the sheeter and after humidification. This teaches the limitation of “measuring moisture of the web by a moisture meter; the moisture meter being arranged downstream relative to the humidifier and upstream relative to the sheet forming portion in a transport direction of the web and the at least one of the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element being configured to be individually controlled based on the moisture of the web measured by the moisture meter”. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of FLYNN with the controls of GORDEN to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the coating as taught by GORDEN.
For claim 13, FLYNN and GORDEN teach the sheet manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, as above. FLYNN teaches the temperature of the water used is essential to drainage [0085]. FLYNN is silent to the use of the temperature as information for the controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN teaches the control system is communicatively coupled to any other moisture sensor or other control or sensing device incorporated into the creping process [0080]. The examiner understands that an in-line caliper would be included in the “any other moisture sensor or sensing device”. This teaches the limitation of “further comprising a water temperature detector configured to measure water temperature of water stored in the humidifier and used for generating mist, wherein the humidifier includes a tank which is a water storage, the water temperature detector is arranged in the tank, and the controller is configured to individually control the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element further based on the water temperature measured by the water temperature detector”.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FLYNN (US 20200283957 A1) in view of GORDEN (US 20210172121 A1), in the alternative also in view of BJERKE (US 20220333307 A1).
For claim 12, FLYNN and GORDEN teach the sheet manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, as above. FLYNN teaches the measurement of the paper thickness by calipers [0149]. FLYNN is silent to the use of the thickness as information for the controller. GORDEN teaches a similar papermaking system that uses a controller to control the coating system [0082]. GORDEN also teaches the use of sensors to inform the controller [0083]. GORDEN teaches the control system is communicatively coupled to any other moisture sensor or other control or sensing device incorporated into the creping process [0080]. The examiner understands that an in-line caliper would be included in the “any other moisture sensor or sensing device”. This teaches the limitation of “further comprising a thickness detector configured to measure a thickness of the web, the thickness detector being a non-contact displacement gauge arranged upstream relative to the humidifier in the transport direction of the web, wherein the controller is configured to individually control the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element further based on the thickness of the web measured by the thickness detector”.
In the alternative, BJERKE teaches a similar coater configuration to GORDEN [abstract]. BJERKE further teaches that the coating application is controlled by the thickness of the coating [0100]. The examiner understands measuring the thickness of the coating requires measuring the web thickness as well. This teaches the limitation of “further comprising a thickness detector configured to measure a thickness of the web, the thickness detector being a non-contact displacement gauge arranged upstream relative to the humidifier in the transport direction of the web, wherein the controller is configured to individually control the first mist generation element and the second mist generation element further based on the thickness of the web measured by the thickness detector”. BJERKE teaches the application of PEM to the cylinder and web improve the web transfer [0004]. It would be obvious to one skilled in the arts at the time of invention to modify the system of GORDEN with the controls of BJERKE to make an effective papermaking system. One would be motivated to modify the system to improve the web transfer as taught by BJERKE.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 STEPHEN M RUSSELL whose telephone number is (571)272-6907. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7:30 to 4:30 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, 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.
/S.M.R./ Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/Abbas Rashid/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights