Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/855,037

A METHOD FOR FORMING A CELLULOSE PRODUCT IN A DRY-FORMING MOULD SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 08, 2024
Examiner
MELENDEZ, ARMAND
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Pulpac AB
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
163 granted / 350 resolved
-18.4% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+42.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
394
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
53.4%
+13.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 350 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/12/26 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 2/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that pressing distance is not identified as a results effective variable within Larsson, but Larsson notes that cavity thickness and shape (ie analogous terms or terms that would encompass pressing distance) have an effect on the shape of the end part, mechanical properties, and pressure applied and therefore are results effective variables. Applicant argues advantages to the pressing element, but this feature is disclosed in Fig 8a-8c and applicant provides no argument in regards to this disclosure. 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. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsson (US 2019/0070819) in view of Hain (US 4554127). As to claim 1, Larsson teaches a method for forming a plurality of discrete three- dimensional cellulose products from an air-formed cellulose blank structure in a multi-cavity forming mould system, wherein the forming mould system comprises a first mould part and a second mould part arranged for cooperating with each other during forming of the cellulose products, wherein the first mould part comprises a plurality of first forming elements and the second mould part comprises a plurality of corresponding second forming elements, wherein the second forming elements are movably arranged in relation to a base structure of the second mould part, wherein each second forming element is arranged for interacting with a pressure member arranged in the base structure, wherein the method comprises the steps: providing the air-formed cellulose blank structure, wherein the cellulose blank structure is air-formed from cellulose fibers, and arranging the cellulose blank structure between the first mould part and the second mould part [claim 1, 0119, 0120, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c]; establishing a plurality of forming cavities for the cellulose blank structure between each first forming element and corresponding second forming element [0119, 0120, 0076, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c]; and establishing a single pressing operation [0064] in each forming cavity onto the cellulose blank structure during forming of the cellulose products [0119, 0120, 0076, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c], Larsson teaches the single forming operation is at a forming pressure level of at least 1-100 MPa in each forming cavity through interaction from the pressure member and at 100-200 C [0073, 0074, 0076, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c]. Larsson teaches that the pressing operation may be as little as 0.1 seconds [0085] and notes that the amount of time in the forming step may range “range from 0.1 seconds to several seconds, depending on the forming temperature of the cellulose blank and the pressure applied.” In other words, forming time is a results effective variable. It is well settled that the determination of the optimum value of a result effective variable, in this case formation time duration, is within the skill of one practicing art, see MPEP § 2144.05 II. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize formation time duration to the exact value of 0.15-1s, as suggested by Larsson, in order to account for the desired temperature and pressure to result in desired material properties. Moreover, it has been held that choosing the over lapping portion of the range taught in the prior art is a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP 2144.05 I. Larsson notes that the cellulose blank has a water content prior to forming [0072], but Larsson does not explicitly state that the moisture content is in a range of 4-15% before the cellulose product is formed by pressing and heating. Hain teaches a method of pressing cellulosic blanks [Abstract] wherein the blank has a water content between 3-7% and notes that 10% is the conventional amount [col 6 line 44-68]. This water content has several advantages in that it “increases the stiffness of the formed receptacle, reduces the dwell time of the blank in the dies, eliminates a drying cycle and reduces curl problems in the press feed” [col 6 line 44-68] as well as improve formability [Abstract, col 3 line 40-45]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention and utilized a water content of 3-7%, as suggested by Hain, in order to increase the stiffness of the formed receptacle, reduce the dwell time of the blank in the dies, eliminate a drying cycle and reduces curl problems in the press feed. Larsson teaches holding the first mould part and the second mould part in a non-moving relationship during the predetermined forming time duration, wherein in the non- moving relationship the first mould part and the second mould part are arranged at a predetermined pressing distance from each other in the pressing direction, wherein the predetermined pressing distance is establishing the forming pressure onto the cellulose blank structure arranged in the forming mould between the first mould part and the second mould part as the blank is held at certain die shape a given forming time [0085, 0106-0111] as predetermined pressing distance phrased as cavity thickness [0106-0109] is a results effective variable on pressure applied and on part ending thickness. It is well settled that the determination of the optimum value of a result effective variable, in this case predetermined pressing distance, is within the skill of one practicing art and just routine experimentation , see MPEP § 2144.05 II. As to claim 3, Larsson teaches releasing the first mould part and the second mould part from each other after the predetermined forming time duration; and removing the formed cellulose product from the forming mould within a releasing time duration from initiating the releasing of the first mould part and the second mould part from each other [0086]. As to claim 4, Larsson teaches applying a predetermined maximum pressing force onto the first mould part and/or the second mould part during the predetermined forming time duration, wherein the predetermined maximum pressing force is establishing the forming pressure onto the cellulose blank structure arranged in the forming mould between the first mould part and the second mould part [0085, 0069 isostatic pressure, 0059]. [0106-0111]. As to claim 6, Larsson teaches the mold comprises stiff first and 2nd parts (2a,2b) and establishing a minimum gap distance in the pressing direction at the predetermined pressing distance between the first stiff mould part section and the second stiff mould part section [0085, 0106-0111]. As to claim 7, Larsson teaches establishing a forming cavity between the first mould part and the second mould part when the cellulose blank structure is arranged in the forming mould between the first mould part and the second mould part [0119, 0120, 0076, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c]. As to claim 9, Larsson teaches the first mould part and/or the second mould part comprises a heating unit (either heating fluid channels or resistive heaters), wherein the method further comprises the steps: heating the first mould part and/or the second mould part to a forming mould temperature in the range of 100-200 °C [0073, 0074, 0076]; and heating the cellulose blank structure to the forming temperature when forming the cellulose product (1) in the single pressing operation during the predetermined forming time duration through heat transfer from the first mould part and/or the second mould part [0073, 0074, 0076]. As to claim 10, Larsson teaches a method for forming a plurality of discrete three- dimensional cellulose products from an air-formed cellulose blank structure in a multi-cavity forming mould system, wherein the forming mould system comprises a first mould part and a second mould part arranged for cooperating with each other during forming of the cellulose products, wherein the first mould part comprises a plurality of first forming elements and the second mould part comprises a plurality of corresponding second forming elements, wherein the second forming elements are movably arranged in relation to a base structure of the second mould part, wherein each second forming element is arranged for interacting with a pressure member arranged in the base structure, wherein the method comprises the steps: providing the air-formed cellulose blank structure, wherein the cellulose blank structure is air-formed from cellulose fibers, and arranging the cellulose blank structure between the first mould part and the second mould part [claim 1, 0119, 0120, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c]; establishing a plurality of forming cavities for the cellulose blank structure between each first forming element and corresponding second forming element [0119, 0120, 0076, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c]; and establishing a single pressing operation [0064] in each forming cavity onto the cellulose blank structure during forming of the cellulose products [0119, 0120, 0076, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c], Larsson teaches the single forming operation is at a forming pressure level of at least 1-100 MPa in each forming cavity through interaction from the pressure member and at 100-200 C [0073, 0074, 0076, Fig 2a-3b, 5a-9c]. Larsson teaches that the pressing operation may be as little as 0.1 seconds [0085] and notes that the amount of time in the forming step may range “range from 0.1 seconds to several seconds, depending on the forming temperature of the cellulose blank and the pressure applied.” In other words, forming time is a results effective variable. It is well settled that the determination of the optimum value of a result effective variable, in this case formation time duration, is within the skill of one practicing art, see MPEP § 2144.05 II. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize formation time duration to the exact value of 0.15-1s, as suggested by Larsson, in order to account for the desired temperature and pressure to result in desired material properties. Moreover, it has been held that choosing the over lapping portion of the range taught in the prior art is a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP 2144.05 I. Larsson notes that the cellulose blank has a water content prior to forming [0072], but Larsson does not explicitly state that the moisture content is in a range of 4-15% before the cellulose product is formed by pressing and heating. Hain teaches a method of pressing cellulosic blanks [Abstract] wherein the blank has a water content between 3-7% and notes that 10% is the conventional amount [col 6 line 44-68]. This water content has several advantages in that it “increases the stiffness of the formed receptacle, reduces the dwell time of the blank in the dies, eliminates a drying cycle and reduces curl problems in the press feed” [col 6 line 44-68] as well as improve formability [Abstract, col 3 line 40-45]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention and utilized a water content of 3-7%, as suggested by Hain, in order to increase the stiffness of the formed receptacle, reduce the dwell time of the blank in the dies, eliminate a drying cycle and reduces curl problems in the press feed. Larsson teaches holding the first mould part and the second mould part in a non-moving relationship during the predetermined forming time duration, wherein in the non- moving relationship the first mould part and the second mould part are arranged at a predetermined pressing distance from each other in the pressing direction, wherein the predetermined pressing distance is establishing the forming pressure onto the cellulose blank structure arranged in the forming mould between the first mould part and the second mould part as the blank is held at certain die shape a given forming time [0085, 0106-0111] as predetermined pressing distance phrased as cavity thickness [0106-0109] is a results effective variable on pressure applied and on part ending thickness. It is well settled that the determination of the optimum value of a result effective variable, in this case predetermined pressing distance, is within the skill of one practicing art and just routine experimentation , see MPEP § 2144.05 II. Larsson teaches the first mould part and/or the second mould part comprises a deformation element (4), wherein the method further comprises the steps: compressing the deformation element (4) upon forming of the cellulose product by pressing the cellulose blank structure when arranged between the first mould part and the second mould part in the single pressing operation wherein in the single pressing operation during the predetermined forming time duration the deformation element is compressed to a compressed maximum extension in the pressing direction from an initial maximum extension in the pressing direction [0117, Fig 8a-8c]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARMAND MELENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0342. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 6 PM Monday-Friday. 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached on 571-272-1234. 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. /ARMAND MELENDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 08, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 04, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600067
INJECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594711
RECIPROCATING INJECTION UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594702
MACHINE AND METHOD FOR INJECTION MOLDING MULTILAYER ARTICLES HAVING A HIGH PROPORTION OF INTERNAL LAYER MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12533836
INJECTION MOLDING UNIT FOR AN INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE FOR PROCESSING PLASTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12528238
DRIVE MECHANISM, INJECTION APPARATUS, AND INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
47%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+42.7%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 350 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