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 .
This Office Action is in response to the applicant’s filing on 10/14/2024.
Claims 1-19 are pending and examined below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/14/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the more than one parallel material rolls as stated in claim 15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 6 line 3, the phrase “electrical resistance member” appears to be a typographical error and should be written as “electrical resistance”.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Regarding claim 1, the following phrases are interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
“means for transferring”, structure disclosed as a belt on page 12 lines 11-13;
“means for bending”, structure disclosed as rollers and/or sliders on page 10 lines 2-4; and
“means for shaping”, structure disclosed as mold means on page 10 lines 12-14.
Regarding claim 3, the phrase “mold means” is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). No structure is provided in the specification.
Regarding claim 8, the phrase “means for cooling the bearings” is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). No structure is provided in the specification.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase “means for transferring heat” is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). No structure is provided in the specification.
Regarding claim 10, the phrase “means for cooling the mandrel” is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). Structure disclosed as air holes on page 12 lines 8-9.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
fastening means in claim 1;
means for bending and shaping in claim 3; and
means for preheating in claim 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 1-19 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim limitation “mold means” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. On page 9 lines 11-12 of the Specification, the bent web is disclosed to be shaped by a mold means. The Specification as originally filed does not provide any corresponding structure to perform the mold means. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim limitation “means for cooling the bearings” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. On page 13 lines 7-9 of the Specification, the cooling is disclosed to be done by air blown to the bearings. The Specification as originally filed does not provide any corresponding structure to perform the cooling means Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim limitation “means for transferring heat” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. On page 11 lines 1-3 of the Specification, the preheating is disclosed to be done by any suitable arrangement. The Specification as originally filed does not provide any corresponding structure to perform the transferring means. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Regarding claim 1 lines 4-5, the phrase “receiving the U-shaped continuous material web … shaping the continuous U-shaped material web” renders claim 1 vague and indefinite because it is unclear if these webs are the same or different webs. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “receiving the U-shaped continuous material web … shaping the U-shaped continuous material web”.
Claims 2, 5-6, and 10 are dependent of claim 1 and include all the same limitations.
Regarding claim 3 line 2, the phrase “are rollers and/or sliders or mold means” render claim 3 vague and indefinite because it is unclear what combination of features is included. The phrase “and/or” implies that the list comprises only the first feature, only the second feature, or both the first and second feature. It is unclear how the feature following “or” relates to the features in the “and/or” phrase. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “are rollers, sliders, or mold means”.
Regarding claim 4 lines 2-3, the phrase “heated rollers is 10-100, preferably 20-80, and advantageously 30-70” renders claim 4 vague and indefinite because it includes a broad range with a narrow range. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
Regarding claim 7 line 3, the phrase “or the like” renders claim 7 vague and indefinite because the claim includes elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "or the like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 8 line 2, the phrase “cooling the bearings” renders claim 8 vague and indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 8 is dependent of claim 1, and claim 1 does not disclose a bearing. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “cooling a bearing”.
Regarding claim 9 line 4, the phrase “which means are” renders claim 9 vague and indefinite because it is unclear which “means” is being referred too. Claim 9 is dependent of claim 1, and claim 1 discloses several “means for” features. It is unclear which of these “means for” features the phrase is referring to. For examining purpose, the phrase is interpreted as “wherein the means for preheating are”.
Regarding claim 9 line 4, the phrase “are hot air blower, heat radiator or” also renders claim 9 vague and indefinite because it is unclear if this is a new or previously mentioned feature. When a new feature is introduced, the feature should be preceded by “a”. When a previous feature is being referred to, the feature should be preceded by "the" or "said". For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “are a hot air blower, a heat radiator or”.
Regarding claim 9 line 4, the phrase “or other suitable means” also renders claim 9 vague and indefinite because the claim includes elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "or other suitable means"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 11 line 4, the phrase “web to the apparatus” renders claim 11 vague and indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Prior to the quoted phrase, there is no mention of an apparatus. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “web to an apparatus”.
Regarding claim 11 lines 10-17, the phrase “fastening the overlapping edge section of the O-shaped continuous material in a fastening means by the help of rollers … fastening the overlapping edge section of the O-shaped continuous material is made with the heated rollers” also renders claim 11 vague and indefinite because it is unclear if these are two different fastening steps or further disclosing the same fastening step. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “fastening the overlapping edge section of the O-shaped continuous material in a fastening means by the help of rollers … wherein the fastening the overlapping edge section of the O-shaped continuous material is made with the heated rollers”.
Regarding claim 11 line 12, the phrase “with transverse cutter” also renders claim 11 vague and indefinite because it is unclear if this is a new or previously mentioned feature. When a new feature is introduced, the feature should be preceded by “a”. When a previous feature is being referred to, the feature should be preceded by "the" or "said". For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “with a transverse cutter”.
Claims 13-14 and 17-19 are dependent of claim 11 and include all the same limitations.
Regarding claim 12 line 2, the phrase “the bearings of the heated rollers are cooled” renders claim 12 vague and indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 12 is dependent of claim 11, and claim 11 does not disclose a bearing. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “the heated rollers comprise a bearing, wherein the bearing is cooled”.
Regarding claim 15 line 1, the phrase “characterized in that the production machine comprises more than one parallel webs, which are rolled out form more than one parallel material rolls to produce parallelly the drinking straw” renders claim 15 vague and indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 is dependent of claim 11, and claim 11 does not disclose a production machine. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “wherein the feeding step comprises feeding more than one parallel continuous material webs to the apparatus to produce parallelly the drinking straw”.
Regarding claim 16 line 2, the phrase “the drinking straw edge section” renders claim 16 vague and indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 16 is dependent of claim 11, and claim 11 does not disclose a drinking straw edge section. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “the overlapping edge section”.
Regarding claim 16 line 3, the phrase “a shapeable sheet-like piece overlapped material layers” renders claim 16 vague and indefinite because it is unclear what features are implied by the term “sheet-like”. It is also unclear how the phrase “overlapped material layers” relates to the piece. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “a shapeable piece having overlapped material layers”
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 1-4, 6, 10-11, 14, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Huang (2021/0114327) in view of reference Herrington (4,721,502).
Regarding claim 1, Huang discloses an apparatus (1) for manufacturing straws, wherein the apparatus (1) comprises:
means for transferring (11) a continuous material web (21) through the apparatus (1);
means for bending (12) the continuous material web (21) into a U-shape;
a mandrel (131) for receiving the U-shaped continuous material web;
mold means for shaping (133) U-shaped continuous material web into a O-shape with an overlapping edge section (221) around the mandrel (131);
fastening means for fastening (134) the overlapping edge section (221) around the mandrel (131); and
a transverse cutter (15),
wherein the fastening means comprises a roller (134).
(Figure 1, 5, 8, 10 and Page 2 paragraph 19, 20, 21, 23)
However, Huang does not disclose the fastening means comprises a plurality of rollers in a row.
Herrington discloses a fastening means (30) comprising: an electric heating element (56); and a plurality of rollers (59) in a row, wherein the electric heating element (56) heats the plurality of rollers (59). (Figure 5 and Column 4 lines 65-68, Column 5 lines 57-60)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the fastening means of Huang by incorporating the electric heating element and the plurality of rollers as taught by Herrington, since column 6 lines 13-21 of Herrington states such a modification would allow the heat to be delivered to the continuous material web in smaller increments.
Regarding claim 2, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the mandrel (Huang – 131) is part of a L-shaped tool (Huang – Figure 9) with one end attached to the apparatus and the other end straight and horizontal part of the tool having an open end. (Huang – Figure 8, 9)
Regarding claim 3, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the means for bending and shaping the continuous material web (Huang – 21) into the U-shape and further into the O-shape comprises: rollers; sliders; or mold means. (Huang – Figures 2, 5 and Page 2 paragraph 20, 21)
Regarding claim 4, Herrington disclose the number of the heated rollers (59) is 8. (Column 6 lines 13-14)
However, Huang modified by Herrington do not disclose the number of the heated rollers is 10-100.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art to have 10-100 heated rollers, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. [MPEP 2144.05 (II-A)]
On page 12 lines 18-21, the number of rollers is disclosed to be selected freely. The Specification as originally filed does not disclose any criticality for the claimed feature. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify Huang and Herrington to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4 because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 6, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the rollers (Herrington – 59) are attached to a heating member (Herrington – 56) which is heated by electrical resistance. (Herrington – Column 4 lines 65-68, Column 5 lines 57-60)
Regarding claim 10, on page 12 lines 7-9 of the Specification, the means for cooling the mandrel is disclosed as blowing air through the mandrel and the mandrel having air holes. Huang discloses blowing air (1310) through the mandrel (131), wherein mandrel has air holes (1311). (Figure 9 and Page 2 paragraph 21) Therefore, Huang modified by Herrington disclose means for cooling the mandrel.
Regarding claim 11, Huang discloses a method for manufacturing straws, wherein the method comprises the steps of:
unwinding a continuous material web (21) from a roll;
feeding the continuous material web (21) to an apparatus (1);
shaping the continuous material web (21) into a U-shape;
transferring the U-shaped continuous material web around a mandrel (131);
shaping the U-shaped continuous material web into a O-shape having an overlapping edge section (221);
fastening the overlapping edge section (221) of the O-shaped continuous material web,
wherein the fastening is conducted by a fastening means by the help of a roller (134); and
cutting the O-shaped continuous material web with a transverse cutter (15).
(Figure 1, 5, 8, 10 and Page 2 paragraph 19, 20, 21, 23)
However, Huang does not disclose the fastening means comprises a plurality of heated rollers.
Herrington discloses a fastening means (30) comprising: an electric heating element (56); and a plurality of rollers (59) in a row, wherein the electric heating element (56) heats the plurality of rollers (59). (Figure 5 and Column 4 lines 65-68, Column 5 lines 57-60)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the fastening means of Huang by incorporating the electric heating element and the plurality of rollers as taught by Herrington, since column 6 lines 13-21 of Herrington states such a modification would allow the heat to be delivered to the continuous material web in smaller increments.
Regarding claim 14, on page 12 lines 7-9 of the Specification, the means for cooling the mandrel is disclosed as blowing air through the mandrel and the mandrel having air holes. Huang discloses blowing air (1310) through the mandrel (131), wherein mandrel has air holes (1311). (Figure 9 and Page 2 paragraph 21) Therefore, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the mandrel is cooled.
Regarding claim 16, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the overlapping edge section (Huang – 221) is formed by fastening a shapeable piece having overlapped material layers by adhesive or by sealing. (Huang – Figure 10 and Page 2 paragraph 21)
Regarding claim 19, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the mandrel (Huang – 131) is part of a L-shaped tool. (Huang – Figure 9)
Claims 5, 9, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Huang (2021/0114327) in view of reference Herrington (4,721,502) as applied to claims 1 and 11 respectively, and further in view of reference Wright et al. (2,653,432).
Regarding claim 5, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose the rollers are curved or concave.
Wright et al. disclose a fastening means comprising: a preheating element (28); and an arcuate roller (24), wherein the surface of the arcuate roller (24) is concave to meet the curvature of a mandrel (10). (Figure 3 and Column 4 lines 50-65)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified fastening means Huang by incorporating the concave surface and preheating element as taught by Wright et al., since column 4 lines 65-68 of Wright et al. states such a modification would allow for more desired sealing of the overlapping edge section.
Regarding claim 9, Huang modified by Herrington and Wright et al. disclose means for preheating the continuous material web (Huang – 21) before the shaping of the web and/or before fastening the overlapping edge section (Huang – 221), wherein the means for preheating are a hot air blower or a heat radiator (Wright et al. – 28). (Wright et al. – Column 4 lines 55-65)
Regarding claim 13, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose the step of preheating the continuous material web.
Wright et al. disclose a fastening means comprising: a preheating element (28); and an arcuate roller (24), wherein the surface of the arcuate roller (24) is concave to meet the curvature of a mandrel (10). (Figure 3 and Column 4 lines 50-65)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified fastening means Huang by incorporating the concave surface and preheating element as taught by Wright et al., since column 4 lines 65-68 of Wright et al. states such a modification would allow for more desired sealing of the overlapping edge section.
Claims 7-8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Huang (2021/0114327) in view of reference Herrington (4,721,502) as applied to claims 1 and 11 respectively, and further in view of reference Sugioka et al. (4,822,972).
Regarding claim 7, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose bearings.
Sugioka et al. disclose a heated roller (1) comprising: a pair of bearings (18, 19); and a means for cooling the bearings (18, 19). (Column 4 lines 43-50, 56-60)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the roller of Huang by incorporating the bearing and cooling means as taught by Sugioka et al., since column 3 lines 26-40 of Sugioka et al. states such a modification would allow the heated roller to be rotatable relative to the housing while also preventing damage to the bearings.
Regarding claim 8, Huang modified by Herrington and Sugioka et al. disclose means for cooling the bearings (Sugioka et al. – 18, 19) of the heated rollers (Herrington – 59). (Sugioka et al. – Column 5 lines 5-9)
Regarding claim 12, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose cooled bearings.
Sugioka et al. disclose a heated roller (1) comprising: a pair of bearings (18, 19); and a means for cooling the bearings (18, 19). (Column 4 lines 43-50, 56-60)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the roller of Huang by incorporating the bearing and cooling means as taught by Sugioka et al., since column 3 lines 26-40 of Sugioka et al. states such a modification would allow the heated roller to be rotatable relative to the housing while also preventing damage to the bearings.
Claims 15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Huang (2021/0114327) in view of reference Herrington (4,721,502) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of reference Salomäki et al. (2021/0037999).
Regarding claim 15, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose more than one parallel webs.
Salomäki et al. disclose a method of manufacturing a drinking straw, wherein the method comprises the step of forming more than one parallel webs. (Page 3 paragraph 39)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the method of Huang by incorporating the step of using more than one parallel web as taught by Salomäki et al., since page 3 paragraph 39 of Salomäki et al. states such a modification would allow for simultaneous manufacturing of multiple drinking straws.
Regarding claim 17, Huang modified by Herrington disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose treating the raw cut edges.
Salomäki et al. disclose a method of manufacturing a drinking straw, wherein the method comprises the step of: treating the raw cut edge with hydrophobic coating; and pressing flat the raw cut edge. (Page 3 paragraph 42)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the method of Huang by incorporating the step of treating and pressing as taught by Salomäki et al., since page 3 paragraph 42 of Salomäki et al. states such a modification would help avoid waterlogging of the drinking straw.
Regarding claim 18, Huang modified by Herrington and Salomäki et al. disclose the drinking straw outer raw cut edge is pressed flat. (Salomäki et al. – Page 3 paragraph 42)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B FRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0396. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thur 7am-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, Shelley Self can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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.
/PATRICK B FRY/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 June 12, 2026
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights