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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 21 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim has not been further treated on the merits.
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.
Claims 1-37 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
Regarding claims 1-37 are replete with the phrase " in particular " renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is unclear. What are modified parts of a fine opening stage or carding stage?
Regarding claim 19, the phrase " preferably " renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 28, the claim seems to reintroduce the claim elements first introduced in claim 1 including an electrostatic unit, electric field-generating means, mechanical fiber-treatment means, and separation means. It is unclear if these elements are the same elements or new elements?
Regarding claim 32, the phrase " preferred " renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 20-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The claim limitations of claims 20 and 28 match the claim limitations of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-7, 12-15, 20, 26-28, 32, 35, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu (CN109881306) (translation provided in IDS dated 11/5/2024).
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses an extraction module for extracting synthetic fiber material from mixed textile waste fiber material (paragraph 0004), in particular comprising or being core-yarn waste fiber material, containing synthetic fiber material and natural fiber material (paragraph 0012-0013), the extraction module comprising: a. an electrostatic charging unit that is configured to be mountable at a textile recycling machine for electric charging a fiber fleece of the mixed textile fiber material and/or for moving charged synthetic fiber material closer to a surface of the fiber fleece (paragraphs 0013 where electrostatic adsorption is applied to the material), and b. a separation stage comprising separation means for removing a layer, in particular a surface layer, of the fiber fleece containing an increased or decreased concentration of the synthetic fiber material (paragraph 0013 where electrostatic separation is carried out after adsorption).
Regarding claim 4, Wu discloses an electrical interface for providing electric power to the electrostatic charging unit (paragraph 0045 where the powering on of the apparatus requires an electrical interface to conduct power to the charging unit), and/or further comprises comprising mounting means configured for mounting or retrofitting the electrostatic charging unit to the textile recycling machine.
Regarding claim 5, Wu discloses the separation means comprise electrical separation means for applying an electric separation field to the charged fiber fleece for moving or further moving the charged synthetic fiber material closer to the surface of the fiber fleece (paragraph 0013 electrical separation).
Regarding claim 6, Wu discloses the electrical separation means comprise electrodes for applying the electric separation field to the charged fiber fleece (paragraph 0021 polar plates) and/or comprise an electric roller or an electrostatic conveyor belt for electric charging the synthetic fiber material and/or electrically attracting the charged synthetic fiber material.
Regarding claim 7, Wu discloses the separation means comprise mechanical fiber-treatment means for treating the charged fiber fleece in order to further move the charged synthetic fiber material closer to the surface of the fleece (paragraph 0010 fiberizing treatment), in particular when exposed to the electrostatic separation field.
Regarding claim 12, Wu discloses the separation stage is a separation unit that is configured to be mounted to the textile recycling machine (paragraphs 0002 and 0006), in particular as a retrofit.
Regarding claim 13, Wu discloses the separation unit comprises an electric interface for providing power for driving the separation means (paragraph 0045 where the powering on of the apparatus requires an electrical interface to conduct power to the charging unit) and/or further comprises mounting means configured for mounting or retrofitting the mechanical separation unit to the textile recycling machine.
Regarding claim 14, Wu discloses the separation stage is or comprises modified parts of the recycling machine, in particular of a fine opening stage or carding stage of the textile recycling machine (paragraphs 0009-0010).
Regarding claim 15, Wu discloses the modified parts of the textile recycling machine comprise one or more of: a roller retrofitted with electric or triboelectric means to obtain an electrically chargeable roller; an electric roller retrofit-mounted in proximity to a fiber fleece path in the recycling machine; an electric separation-field generating means (paragraph 0013), e.g. comprising or being stationary electrodes or an electrostatic conveyor belt, retrofit-mounted in proximity to a fiber fleece path in the recycling machine; and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 20, Wu discloses a textile recycling machine for treating a fleece of waste yarn containing synthetic fiber material and natural fiber material, in particular a fine opening stage or carding stage of a textile recycling machine, in particular the textile recycling machine for implementing the method for recycling textiles according to claim 35, wherein the textile recycling machine comprises or is retrofitted with an extraction module for extracting synthetic fiber material from mixed textile waste fiber material, in particular comprising or being core- yarn waste fiber material, containing synthetic fiber material and natural fiber material, the extraction module comprising: a) an electrostatic charging unit that is configured to be mountable at a textile recycling machine for electric charging a fiber fleece of the mixed textile fiber material and/or for moving charged synthetic fiber material closer to a surface of the fiber fleece (paragraphs 0013 where electrostatic adsorption is applied to the material), and b) a separation stage comprising separation means for removing a layer, in particular a surface layer, of the fiber fleece containing an increased or decreased concentration of the synthetic fiber material (paragraph 0013 where electrostatic separation is carried out after adsorption).
Regarding claim 26, Wu discloses the extraction module does not comprise pneumatic means for transporting the fleece of the mixed textile waste fiber material, and/or wherein the extraction module does not comprise chemical means for extracting fiber material components (paragraph 0024).
Regarding claim 27, Wu discloses the fleece of waste yarn is cleaned from the synthetic fiber material to obtain recycled natural fiber of a quality sufficient for reuse in fiber spinning, in particular fiber rotor spinning (paragraph 0014).
Regarding claim 28, Wu discloses a method for extracting synthetic fiber material from a fleece of mixed textile waste fiber material containing a synthetic fiber material and a natural fiber material, in particular the method being implemented by an extraction module of claim 1, the method comprising the method steps of: a. exposing the fleece to an electrostatic charging field provided by an electrostatic unit for electrostatic charging the synthetic fiber material in the fleece (paragraph 0013; electrostatic adsorption), b. applying an electrostatic separation field provided by electric field- generating means for providing a movement direction of the charged synthetic fiber material towards a surface layer of the fleece (paragraph 0013; electrostatic separation), c. mechanically treating the fleece by mechanical fiber-treatment means for promoting movement of the charged synthetic fiber material towards the surface layer of the fleece, in particular when the fleece is exposed to the electrostatic separation field (paragraph 0018; fiberizing treatment), and d. removing a layer containing an increased or decreased concentration of the synthetic fiber material by separation means, in particular mechanical separation means (paragraph 0024; physical separation).
Regarding claim 32, Wu discloses the fleece of mixed textile waste fiber material contains the synthetic fiber material in an initial concentration range of at most 10%, preferred at most 5%, more preferred at most 3%, more preferred at most 2%; and/or wherein the fleece of mixed textile waste fiber material comprises or is core-yarn textile waste fiber material (paragraph 0046); and/or wherein the fleece does not contain blended-fabrics textile waste fiber material.
Regarding claim 35, Wu discloses a fleece of mixed textile waste fiber material, in particular comprising or being core-yarn waste, containing a synthetic fiber material and a natural fiber material is formed, wherein the method for extracting synthetic fiber material from the fleece is performed according to claim 28 (paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 36, Wu discloses method for retrofitting a textile recycling machine with an extraction module according to any one of the Method for retrofitting a textile recycling machine with an extraction module according to any one of the comprising the method steps of: a. providing at least one extraction module, each extraction module comprising an electrostatic charging unit and a separation stage, in particular separation unit (paragraph 0013), b. mounting the electrostatic charging unit to the textile recycling machine and providing electric power to the electrostatic charging unit (paragraph 0045), and c. mounting the separation stage to the textile recycling machine and providing electric power to the separation stage (paragraph 0045).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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 2, 3, 34, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Design Choice.
Regarding claim 2, Wu does not explicitly disclose the electrostatic charging unit is configured to be mounted, in particular retrofitted, at a fine opening stage of the textile recycling machine. However, before the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to mount a device because Applicant has not disclosed that a specific mounting provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wu, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either mounting because both mounting apparatuses would perform the same function of mounting a charging unit for the purpose of electrostatically assisting in the separation of fibers.
Regarding claim 3, Wu does not explicitly disclose the electrostatic charging unit is configured to be mounted, in particular retrofitted, after a carding stage of the textile recycling machine. However, before the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to mount a device because Applicant has not disclosed that a specific mounting provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wu, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either mounting because both mounting apparatuses would perform the same function of mounting a charging unit for the purpose of electrostatically assisting in the separation of fibers.
Regarding claim 34, Wu does not explicitly disclose the additional method step of repeating at least one of: the combined steps a. and b. or the step c. or the step d. or a combination thereof, until the recycled natural fiber is obtained in a quality that is sufficient for reuse in a fiber spinning process, in particular fiber rotor spinning process. However, before the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to electrostatically separate fibers because Applicant has not disclosed that multiple extraction modules provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wu, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either amount of extraction modules because both extraction modules would perform the same function of fiber separation for the purpose of electrostatically separate fibers.
Regarding claim 37, Wu does not explicitly disclose the electrostatic charging unit is retrofitted to a fine opening stage of the recycling machine; and/or wherein the separation stage is retrofitted to a fine opening stage of the textile recycling machine. However, before the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to mount a device because Applicant has not disclosed that a specific mounting provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wu, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either mounting because both mounting apparatuses would perform the same function of mounting a charging unit for the purpose of electrostatically assisting in the separation of fibers.
Claims 8-11, 18, 19, 22-24, and 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Rowe (USP 6,061,876).
Regarding claim 8, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the mechanical fiber-treatment means comprise a carding roller for carding the charged fiber fleece (col. 5, lines 20-27; carding plates on a roller) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 9, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the separation means comprise mechanical separation means that are configured to remove a surface layer containing an increased concentration of the synthetic fiber material (col. 5, lines 20-27; carding removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 10, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the separation means comprise mechanical separation means that are configured to remove a layer, in particular opposite surface layer or volume layer, of the natural fiber material containing a decreased concentration of the synthetic fiber material (col. 5, lines 20-27; carding removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 11, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the mechanical separation means comprises at least one separation tool selected from the group consisting of: a tee roller, a knife, a skiving tool, -a knock- off toll, a brush, a brush roller, a grate, or combinations thereof (col. 5, lines 20-27; carding surfaces having a granular surface removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 18, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the mechanical fiber-treatment means comprises a carding roller rotating in a transportation direction of the fiber fleece for carding and moving the fiber fleece into the electrostatic separation field of the electric separation means, in particular of an electrostatic conveyor belt (see Fig. 3 and col. 5, lines 20-27; carding removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 19, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the mechanical separation means comprise a counter-rotating roller, in particular a brush roller, for separating a first layer, in particular a volume layer, of the fiber fleece containing the natural fiber material with a decreased concentration of the synthetic fiber material from a second layer, in particular a surface layer, containing an increased concentration of the synthetic fiber material, in particular when adhering to the electric separation means, preferably an electrostatic conveyor belt (see Fig. 3 and col. 5, lines 20-27; carding surfaces having a granular surface removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 22, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the electric separation-field generating means, in particular the electrostatic conveyor belt, is mounted on top of a carding device of the textile recycling machine and/or replaces a cover of the carding device (see Fig. 3 and col. 5, lines 20-27; carding surfaces having a granular surface removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 23, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the carding device of the textile recycling machine comprises the mechanical fiber-treatment means and the mechanical separation means (col. 4, lines 64+ and col. 5, lines 1-27 where there are carding plates and wire clothing) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 24, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches fleece transportation means for delivering the fleece to and from the extraction module, in particular a feeding conveyor belt, an exit conveyor belt, and optionally a rearward conveyor belt for refeeding the fleece to at least one of the extraction modules (col. 4, lines 4-15; feeding conveyor) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 29, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches in step d.: removing the surface layer containing an increased concentration of the synthetic fiber material by electric separation means, and/or removing an opposite surface layer or a volume layer of the natural fiber material containing a decreased concentration of the synthetic fiber material by mechanical separation means (see Fig. 3 and col. 5, lines 20-27; carding surfaces having a granular surface removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 30, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches at least one of the method steps of: a0. carding the fiber fleece before step a. b0. carding the fiber fleece after step a. and before step b., and c0. carding the fiber fleece after step b. and before step c (see Fig. 3 and col. 5, lines 20-27; carding surfaces having a granular surface removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Regarding claim 31, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Rowe teaches the step d. comprises at least one of: tee rolling, kniving, skiving, knocking-off, brushing or grating the fiber fleece for removing the layer, in particular a surface layer (col. 5, lines 20-27; carding surfaces having a granular surface removing materials from the fiber material) for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers (col. 2, lines 3-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Rowe, for the purpose of processing recycled yarn into reusable fibers.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Ihara et al (US Pub 2023/0405604 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Ihara teaches the electric separation-field generating means comprise an electrostatic conveyor belt, which is movable by a drive and comprises an electrically charged pick-up region for attracting the charged synthetic fiber material and a release region for discarding the synthetic fiber material (paragraph 0022), in particular by a brush cleaner or suction cleaner for the purpose of providing a capture region for charged particle separation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Ihara, for the purpose of providing a capture region for charged particle separation.
Regarding claim 17, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Ihara teaches the electrostatic conveyor belt is arranged above the mechanical fiber-treatment means and/or above the mechanical separation means (paragraph 0022 and see Fig. 1) for the purpose of providing a capture region for charged particle separation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Ihara, for the purpose of providing a capture region for charged particle separation.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Frolov et al (USP 3,867,741).
Regarding claim 25, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Frolov teaches a suction roller, which is arranged after the separation stage of the extraction module and serves for recondensing the fiber fleece containing the natural fiber material obtained from the extraction module with improved purity (col. 9, lines 11-19) for the purpose of collecting layers of fiber for further processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Frolov, for the purpose of collecting layers of fiber for further processing.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Kimbrell, Jr. et al (US Pub 2004/0137818 A1).
Regarding claim 33, Wu does not disclose the claim limitations. Kimbrell teaches the synthetic fiber material is or comprises polyurethane (paragraph 0059), in particular elastan; and/or wherein the synthetic fiber material is not or does not comprise polyester as an obvious combination of materials comprising synthetic fibers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wu, as taught by Kimbrell, as an obvious combination of materials comprising synthetic fibers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kalyanavenkateshware Kumar whose telephone number is (571)272-8102. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 08:00-16:30.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached on 571-272-7805. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3653
/MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3653