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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
1. 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.
2. Claims 1-19 and 24 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.
3. Claim 1 is indefinite because it is not clear if Applicants are forming a cellulose blank structure made from cellulose based material and BCC of if the cellulose product is made from defibrating a cellulose blank structure and BCC and/or if the cellulose product is made from cellulose based material and BCC and further comprises an additional cellulose blank structure. For purposes of Examination, the Examiner will construe claim 1 to mean a method of forming a cellulose product from a cellulose based blank material. The scope of claim 1 is further indefinite because the method step comprising “controlling an amount of BCC to not exceed a predetermined maximum value in the product by controlling a ratio between the cellulose based material and the BCC before the first mill and/or in the forming hood” is unclear. Applicants have not recited any specific method or process that is used and/or performed such that the amount of BCC is controlled. Applicants have also not recited how much BBC is used and/or the minimum/maximum amount of BCC used. Applicants have further not recited the ratio between the BCC and the cellulose based material and/or a desired ratio between the BCC and the cellulose based material. As such, the Examiner is not able to determine the full scope of claim 1 and how the claim is limited by the step of controlling the amount of BCC. It is also suggested that Applicants correct instances of the word “fibre” and “mould” to fiber and mold to conform more closely to U.S. spelling and form. Claims 2-19 and 24 are rejected for their dependency on claim 1.
4. Claim 4 recites the limitation "second tissue layer". Claim 2, from which claim 4 depends, only recites a first tissue layer. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
5. Claim 6 is considered indefinite because it is not clear what is meant by “sectioned” cellulose material. Applicants recite pre-treating the cellulose material “partly” with BCC, but it is unclear how partly pretreating the cellulose material with BBC results in a “sectioned” cellulose material. The term “partly” is also not clear or defined. It is not clear what amount or area is considered “partly”.
6. With regard to claim 7, based on the rejection of claim 1 above it appears that claim 7 is not further limiting of claim 1. Claim 1 recites treating the cellulose material with BCC.
7. With regard to claim 8, it is not clear what is meant by the method of “cutting out the cellulose product” and “thereby forming a residual fibre structure”. It is not clear what is meant by “residual fibre structure” and how such a structure is formed by “cutting out” a cellulose product.
8. With regard to claim 9, based upon the rejection of claim 1 above, claim 9 does appear to be further limiting of claim 8 or 1. Claim 1 recites treating the cellulose material with BCC.
9. With regard to claim 10, the Examiner is of the position that the scope of claim 10 is unclear. Applicant have not recited any means or method to “adjust” the amount of BCC. Further, Applicants have not recited a ratio between the “residual fibre” and an amount of cellulose based material.
10. With regard to claim 11, the Examiner is of the position that scope of claim 11 is unclear. It is not clear what is meant by “dynamically” adjusted or what specific method steps are used to “dynamically” adjust the BCC. It is also not clear what is meant by “steady state” or what constitutes the claimed “steady state”.
11. With regard to claim 12, the Examiner is of the position that the scope of claim 12 is unclear. It is not clear what is meant by “dynamically” adjusted or what specific method steps are used to “dynamically” adjust the BCC. It is also not clear what is meant by the BCC in the product is “kept below a predetermined maximum value”. Applicants have not set forth values with respect the amount of BCC, ratio of BCC to cellulose and/or minimum and/or maximum values of cellulose and BCC composition.
12. With regard to claim 16, claim 16 is indefinite because the limitation “the heated forming mould” lacks antecedent basis.
13. With regard to claim 17, claim 17 is indefinite because the limitation “the BCC based product” lacks antecedent basis. Claim 17 is further indefinite because it is not clear what is meant by “suitable thermal processing device”. It is not clear as to what is considered a “suitable” thermal processing device.
14. With regard to claim 19, claim 19 is indefinite because it is not clear what is meant by the “formed tissue”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
15. 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.
16. Claim(s) 1, 5-18 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson et al., SE 1750313 A1.
The published SE document teach forming a cellulose product using the method steps of providing a dry formed cellulose blank of cellulose fibers, adding water and/or one or more material property substances to the cellulose fibers, heating the cellulose fibers to a forming temperature in the range of 140-200°C and pressing cellulose fibers with a forming pressure of at least 4 MPa. (page 4). Said material property substances are disclosed as sizing, starch and/or other substances that contribute the mechanical and chemical features of the cellulose product. The Examiner is of the position that the water and/or the one or more material property substances meets the limitation of the claimed BCC composition. Said composition can be added before or during the heating and pressing of the cellulose fibers (page 6). With respect to the cellulose blank, the published SE document teach that the cellulose blank can come in various forms such as a web, rug, felt, loose fibres, foam or sheets (page 5). Said fibers include wood fibres, cotton and/or linen that have been grinded in a separating unit such as a hammer mill (page 5). The Examiner is of the position that the grinding of the fibers in a hammer mill meets the limitation of fibration. The published SE document teach that the cellulose fibers may be dry formed into the cellulose blank before the heating and pressing (e.g., moulding) into cellulose products. (page 15). The published SE document teach a dry forming use that comprises a separating unit, a forming wire and a compacting unit (page 15). The cellulose product is formed by arranging the cellulose blank into a forming mould and applying heat (140-200°C) and pressure (4 MPa) (page 17). The water and/or one or more material property substances (BCC composition) are added during the method step of dry forming the cellulose fibers in the dry forming unit (page 19).
17. Claim(s) 2-4 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson et al., SE 1750313 A1 as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of EP 3587665 A1.
Larsson et al., SE 1750313 does not teach the claimed tissue layers.
The published EP 3587665 A1 document A method for producing a three-dimensional product based on cellulose, comprising the following steps: a cellulose-containing blank is positioned in front of a shaping surface of a molding tool that defines the shape of the product, a printed flat material is positioned in front of the shaping surface of the molding tool and with printing is aligned in register with the shaping surface and wherein the blank and the flat material are heated, pressed against the shaping surface and formed into the three-dimensional product (abstract). the blank contains cellulose fibers. According to a further embodiment, the blank consists essentially or exclusively of cellulose fibers. According to a further embodiment, the blank contains cellulose fibers obtained from plant material, for example from wood, cellulose fibers obtained from sugar cane (in particular from bagasse), bamboo, corn, cotton or flax. According to a further embodiment, the cellulose fibers obtained from wood are cellulose (wood pulp or chemical wood pulp) or wood pulp (mechanical wood pulp). According to a further embodiment, the cellulose fibers are chemical fibers (regenerated fibers, for example viscose fibers, modal fibers, lyocell fibers or cuprofibers). These man-made fibers can be made from regenerated or esterified cellulose. According to a further embodiment, the blank contains a mixture natural cellulose fibers and regenerated fibers. According to a further embodiment, the blank comprises additional substances, for example one or more of the following substances: substances which increase strength (e.g. starch or other substances which act as adhesives), substances which reduce hygroscopicity, substances which increase hydrophobicity or dyes. According to a further embodiment, the blank contains less than 45% water, furthermore preferably less than 25% water, furthermore preferably less than 15% water. The Examiner considers these substances sufficient to meet the claimed BCC limitations. According to a further embodiment, the blank contains at least 90% by weight of cellulose fibers. The three-dimensional product can be produced in particular by heating the blank and the printed flat material to a temperature of 100 ° C. to 200 ° C. and applying a pressure to these materials in the range from 1 MPa to 100 MPa.
The published EP document teach that the blank can be produced in particular by separating cellulose fibers from one another, applying the separated cellulose fibers to one side of an air-permeable base, applying a negative pressure to the other side of the air-permeable base and thereby the cellulose fibers on one side of the air-permeable base form a coherent layer. The blank thus formed is also referred to as an "airlaid". The air-permeable base can in particular be an air-permeable drum or an air-permeable conveyor belt. It is also possible to form the blank by applying the cellulose fibers to a tissue paper, the negative pressure being hereby applied to the other side of the tissue paper through an air-permeable base. As a result, a continuous layer of cellulose fibers is formed on the top of the tissue paper and the tissue paper is mechanically connected (for example by interlocking fibers with one another) to the layer of cellulose fibers. In addition, a further layer of tissue paper can be applied to the top of the layer of cellulose fibers as a cover. The additional layer of tissue paper can also be mechanically connected (for example by hooking) to the layer of cellulose fibers. This additional layer of tissue paper is pressed onto the layer of cellulose fibers. (description). The Examiner is of the position that the additional substances such as water and starch applied the cellulose fibers would further permeate into the outer tissue layers. As such, the Examiner is of the position that the outer tissue layers would also comprise the BCC composition. It would It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to form the cellulose blank of Larsson et al., with the tissue cover layers as taught in the published EP document. Motivation is found in the desire to mechanically connect the fibers (e.g., interlock/hook the continuous layer of fibers).
Conclusion
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LYNDA SALVATORE whose telephone number is (571)272-1482. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/LYNDA SALVATORE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789