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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP1104822 (cited on IDS filed 9/10/24). EP1104822 teaches the claimed process as evidenced at paras. 0048-0064 and 0074-0083; and figs 3-4.
Regarding claim 1, EP1104822 teaches:
1. A method of forming a moulded receptacle, the method comprising:
applying a fibre suspension onto a mould cavity wall of a receptacle mould, the fibre suspension at least partially coating the mould cavity wall (EP1104822: para. 0058; figs 3-4);
selecting a particular pressure of between 3.5 bar and 10 bar based on the receptacle type chosen to be molded by the user (EP1104822: paras. 0054 and 0074-0083; the amount of pressure 350 kPa-1000 kPa applied to various portions of the body depends on the shape of the body chosen to be molded by the user); and
supplying a fluid into direct contact with the fibre suspension on the mould cavity wall at the particular pressure for a period of less than about 60 seconds, such that liquid is removed from the fibre suspension through apertures formed in the mould cavity wall to form the moulded receptacle on the mould cavity wall (EP1104822: para. 0060; figs 3-4; superheated steam or air constitutes the claimed fluid).
EP1104822 teaches selecting/setting the amount of pressure applied to specific portions of the body dependent on the shape of the body (EP1104822: paras. 0054 and 0074-0083), but does not explicitly teach using a control system to select the particular pressure. Since molding apparatus controlled by a control system are well-known in the molding art for its efficiency and effectiveness, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a control system to facilitate the selection of amount of pressure used in the process of EP1104822 in order to improve efficiency.
Regarding claim 2, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0058; figs 3-4).
Regarding claim 3, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0058; figs 3-4; the pressure is built up to a final pressure).
Regarding claim 4, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0009; figs 3-4).
Regarding claim 5, EP1104822 teaches a gradual increase of pressure (para. 0058), but does not teach a pulsed pressure. Since it is well-known in the pulp molding art to pulse the pressure during dewatering in order to push more water out, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to pulse the pressure of the fluid of EP1104822 in order to reduce cycle time by dewatering more quickly.
Regarding claim 6, EP1104822 teach supplying a dewatering fluid (para. 0060), but does not explicitly teach the flow rate of the fluid. Dewatering fluid flow rate is well-known in the pulp molding art as an important molding parameter and the desired flow rate would have been obviously and readily determined through routine experimentation by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention. Since the claimed flow rate is generally well-known in the pulp molding art and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to flow the dewatering fluid of EP1104822 at the claimed rate in order to optimize the dewater relative to cycle time.
Regarding claim 7, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0060; figs 3-4).
Regarding claim 8, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0062; figs 3-4; the steam or air is stopped after a specific time).
Regarding claim 9, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0060; figs 3-4;wet preform has an initial water content; dewatered preform has a final water content; final water content compared to initial water content).
Regarding claim 10, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: paras. 0048-0060; figs 3-4).
Regarding claim 11, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0057; figs 3-4; valve 35a is closed before the start of the dewatering).
Regarding claim 12, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0060; figs 3-4; the water content by weight is measured at the beginning for the wet preform and at the end of the dewatering step)
Regarding claim 13, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0067; a heat drying step is performed after the dewatering step).
Claim(s) 16-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP1104822 (cited on IDS filed 9/10/24). EP1104822 teaches the claimed process as evidenced at paras. 0048-0064 and 0074-0083; and figs 3-4.
Regarding claim 16, EP1104822 teaches:
16. A system for forming a moulded receptacle, comprising:
a receptacle mould having a mould cavity wall, the mould cavity wall being configured to receive a coating of a fibre suspension thereon and having apertures formed therein (EP1104822: para. 0048-0064; figs 3-4);
pressure control valve for selecting/setting a particular pressure of between 3.5 bar and 10 bar based on the receptacle type chosen to be molded by the user (EP1104822: paras. 0054 and 0074-0083; the amount of pressure 350 kPa-1000 kPa applied to various portions of the body depends on the shape of the body chosen to be molded by the user); and
a fibre suspension application system configured to apply the fibre suspension onto the mould cavity wall to at least partially coat the mould cavity wall (EP1104822: para. 0065; figs 3-4); and
a fluid supply system configured to supply a fluid into direct contact with the fibre suspension on the mould cavity wall at the particular pressure for a period of less than about 60 seconds, such that liquid is removed from the fibre suspension through the apertures to form the moulded receptacle on the mould cavity wall (EP1104822: para. 0066 and 0068; figs 3-4).
EP1104822 teaches a pressure control valve for selecting/setting the amount of pressure applied to specific portions of the body dependent on the shape of the body (EP1104822: paras. 0054 and 0074-0083), but does not explicitly teach using a control system to select the particular pressure. Since molding apparatus controlled by a control system are well-known in the molding art for its efficiency and effectiveness, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a control system to facilitate the selection of amount of pressure used in the process of EP1104822 in order to improve efficiency.
Regarding claim 17, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0061; figs 3-4; the pressure is measured until a specific pressure is achieved).
Regarding claim 18, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0060; figs 3-4; the water content by weight is measured at the beginning for the wet preform and at the end of the dewatering step).
Regarding claim 20, such is taught by EP1104822 (EP1104822: para. 0055; figs 3-4; drain line 35 is connected to the mold cavity via throughhole 15 is open during the dewatering step).
Applicant's arguments filed 7/24/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues EP1104822 does not teach a control system used to select a particular pressure based on a user input indicative of a receptacle type being molded, or an automatic detection of the receptacle type based on data measured by one or more sensors. This argument is misplaced since EP1104822 teaches a pressure control valve for selecting/setting the amount of pressure applied to specific portions of the body dependent on the shape of the body (EP1104822: paras. 0054 and 0074-0083). Though EP1104822 does not explicitly teach using a control system to select a particular pressure, it is well-known in the molding art to use a molding apparatus with a control system for its efficiency and effectiveness. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a control system to facilitate the selection of amount of pressure used in the process of EP1104822 in order to improve efficiency.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references teach molding receptacles from pulp: USPN 2025053, USP 2003/0150583, EP3708709, USP2022/0170211, and USPN1549903.
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 EDMUND H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1204. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-4PM.
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, Xiao (Sam) Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
EHL
/EDMUND H LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
