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 .
Election/Restriction
REQUIREMENT FOR UNITY OF INVENTION
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475(a), a national stage application shall relate to one invention only or to a group of inventions so linked as to form a single general inventive concept (“requirement of unity of invention”). Where a group of inventions is claimed in a national stage application, the requirement of unity of invention shall be fulfilled only when there is a technical relationship among those inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features. The expression “special technical features” shall mean those technical features that define a contribution which each of the claimed inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art.
The determination whether a group of inventions is so linked as to form a single general inventive concept shall be made without regard to whether the inventions are claimed in separate claims or as alternatives within a single claim. See 37 CFR 1.475(e).
When Claims Are Directed to Multiple Categories of Inventions:
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475 (b), a national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories:
(1) A product and a process specially adapted for the manufacture of said product; or
(2) A product and a process of use of said product; or
(3) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and a use of the said product; or
(4) A process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process; or
(5) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process.
Otherwise, unity of invention might not be present. See 37 CFR 1.475 (c).
Restriction is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372.
This application contains the following inventions or groups of inventions which are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1.
In accordance with 37 CFR 1.499, applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single invention to which the claims must be restricted.
Group I, claim(s) 1 - 25, drawn to an arrangement for producing a layer adhesion of at least two tissue layers by means of cold welding.
Group II, claim(s) 26 - 31, drawn to a method of operating an arrangement for producing a layer adhesion of at least two tissue layers by means of cold welding.
The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons:
Group I and Group II lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of an arrangement for producing a layer adhesion of at least two tissue layers by means of cold welding as described in claim 1, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Leanna et al (US Patent 4,116,594), which incorporates by reference Bray (US Patent 3,721,189). Leanna discloses an arrangement with two rollers forming an embossing gap, where at least one of the rollers has an embossing plate detachably fastened to the roller surface on its roller surface facing the embossing gap, where the embossing plate has an embossing structure characterized in that the embossing plate is fastened to the roller by means of a plurality of magnets distributed over the roller surface and arranged at a distance from one another as disclosed by Bray.
During a telephone conversation with Matthew Johnson of Jones Day for Matthews on July 8, 2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1 - 25. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 26 - 31 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
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 13, 14, 16, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the sleeve" in the second and third line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 is also rejected due to its dependency to claim 13.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the sleeve" in the second line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 23 and 24 are also rejected due to their dependency to claim 16.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 - 5, 15, and 17 - 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Leanna et al (US Patent 4,116,594) which incorporates by reference Bray (US Patent 3,721,189).
With regards to claim 1, Leanna discloses an arrangement that comprises two rollers forming an embossing gap (Figure 1 items 10 and 12. Figure 2 illustrates the embossing gap), where at least one of the rollers has an embossing plate (Figure 3 item 16) that has an embossing structure (as seen in Figure 2), characterized in that the embossing plate is fastened to the roller by means of a plurality of magnets distributed over the roller surface and arranged at a distance from one another (column 4 lines 64 – 68 and column 5 lines 1 – 10; Bray shows the plurality of magnets distributed over the roller surface and arranged at a distance from one another in Figures 2 and 3 item 18).
With regards to claim 2, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Bray teaches that the magnets are releasably received in grooves distributed over the circumference of the roller and spaced apart from one another (Figure 5 item 42).
With regards to claim 3, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Bray teaches that the grooves and the magnets received therein extend substantially in an axial direction of the roller (as seen in Figure 1).
With regards to claim 4, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Bray teaches that the grooves are undercut and open into axial end faces of the roller body, so that the magnets can be mounted of dismounted in the grooves in the axial direction of the roller (as seen in Figure 5).
With regards to claim 5, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Bray teaches that the magnets comprise a permanent magnetic material by means of which the at least one embossing sheet is attached to the roller surface (column 2 lines 18 – 21).
With regards to claim 15, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Leanna teaches that the embossing sheet comprises or consists of at least steel (column 7 lines 48 – 51).
With regards to claim 17, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Leanna teaches that the embossed structure of the embossing sheet has embossed elevations and embossing gap formed between the rollers is designed to produce a dot/dot embossing, an alternating embossing or a dot/surface embossing (Figure 2 items 13 and 15).
With regards to claim 18, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Leanna teaches that the embossed elevations have other geometric embossing shapes (Figure 2 item 13).
With regards to claim 19, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Leanna teaches that the flanks of the embossed elevations are each perpendicular or oblique to the roller surface or concave (as seen in Figure 2 item 15).
With regards to claim 20, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Leanna teaches that the roller opposite the embossing plate has an elastic surface (column 8 lines 36 – 41).
With regards to claims 21 and 22, the teachings of Leanna and Bray are presented above. Additionally, Leanna teaches that the alternating embossing has an alternating dot/ surface embossing, in which adjacent embossing areas an anvil surface is arranged alternately opposite a plurality of pins, where the anvil surface and pins each have a flat surface, where the surfaces are designed to roll on one another in the embossing gap to produce a layer adhesion (column 5 lines 58 – 68, column 6 lines 1 – 2 and 54 – 68, column 7 lines 1 – 43).
Claim Objections
Claims 6 - 12 and 25 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHEL RIVERA whose telephone number is (571)270-7655. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12pm - 8pm.
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 Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
/JOSHEL RIVERA/Examiner, Art Unit 1746
/MICHAEL N ORLANDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights