Detailed Office Action
The communication dated 8/18/2026 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1-17 are pending with claims 12-17 withdrawn from consideration.
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/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I in the reply filed on 8/18/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4 there is a “5” in the middle of the sentence. Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 9 are 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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the bearing of claim 11 as described in the specification (if it is already present it should be numbered and said number should be in the specification). Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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 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.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2009/0139678 NILSSON et al., hereinafter NILSSON.
As for claim 1, “for use in a microwave chamber” is an intended use of the press mold, nevertheless, NILSSON states that the mold can be microwaved [0071]. NILSSON discloses a pulp mold. [Figure 1]. The pulp mold has a gap (300’) between the two mold haves (100, 200) [0056] when in its closed state [Figure 2’].
A mold can be permeable to microwaves in two distinct ways:
The material of the mold.
It has holes that are large enough to allow microwaves to pass through.
As for the material NILSSON discloses sintered graphite and sintered metals. Metals and graphite are reflective of microwaves. Although sintering will change the effect as compared to bulk metals not enough information is given in NILSSON to make a determination of the materials microwave permeability.
Secondly, NILLSON discloses drainage channels in the mold (150, 250) [0012, Figure 2’]. These channels go through the base structure of the mold (110, 210) and then through support layer (220, 120) and surface layer (130, 230) [Figure 2’]. The narrowest portion are 500 microns or less [0024]. A length of 500 microns (0.5 mm) will block some microwaves (such as 2.4 Ghz) but not all microwaves. The applicant claims all microwaves which are 200 MHz to 300 GHz (1 meter to 1 millimeter and is not limited to 2.4 Ghz (12.2 cm wavelength). For the holes to block microwaves at 300 Ghz the hole would need to be much smaller than the wavelength to block (less than 1/10 the size).
As for claim 2, removing a piece of the fiber blank being removed prior to use is an intended use. However, the gap (300’) is at the edge of the molded pulp and could be trimmed [Figure 2’ and 2a’].
As for claim 3, the gap is formed at the neck of the mold [Figure 2’ and 2a’]. The Examiner interprets a gap as a narrowing.
PNG
media_image1.png
207
377
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As for claims 4 and 5, the gap is formed where the top and bottom of the mold attach [Figure 2’].
As for claim 8, NILLSON discloses additional openings (250, 150) [Figure 2’] from which moisture can be discharged.
As for claim 10, walls (120, 130) and (220, 230) which are the support layer and surface layer of the are shown to be substantially uniform in thickness of the wall facing the blank of the top and bottom mold [Figure 2’ and 2a’].
As for claim 11, NILLSON discloses supports (421) which act to prevent bending or deformations [0064 and Figure 10].
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2009/0139678 NILSSON et al., hereinafter NILSSON.
As for claim 7, NILSSON discloses that the gap is substantially smaller than the than the forming space and that the forming space is 0.5 to 2 mm [0056]. The Examiner therefore interprets the gap range as less than 0.5 mm which encompasses the instant claimed range making a prima facie case of obviousness.
Claim 1-5, 7, 8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2009/0139678 NILSSON et al., hereinafter NILSSON, in view of CN205000197U GUO et al., hereinafter GUO.
As for claims 1-5, 7, 8, and 10-11, NILSSON teaches all the features as per supra. NILSSON states that the mold can be microwaved [0071]. The Examiner has argued that the presence of holes which are not significantly smaller than the wavelength of microwaves makes the mold permeable to microwaves. In the alternative, GUO discloses a pulp mold that can hot press a pulp blank [0004, 0005]. The apparatus presses a top (11) and bottom (21) mold together. Excess portions are cut from the semi-finished product [0005]. GUO discloses through holes (111/211) in which moisture can escape [0015]. GUO discloses that the mold is heated by microwaving (30) [Figure 1]. The molds are made out of ceramic or polypropylene material [0013] which are microwave transparent materials. GUO states that microwaves should not contact metallic materials [0035].
At the time of the invention it would be obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the ceramic mold material of GUO for the mold material of NILSSON. The person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so as the metallic material of NILSSON could interfere with the microwave heating. The person of ordinary skill in the art would expect success as both GUO and NILSSON disclose press molds for pulp blanks that have drainage holes and can be microwaved.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY J CALANDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:45 AM -4:15 PM.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571)270-7457. 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.
ANTHONY J. CALANDRA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1748
/Anthony Calandra/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights