Office Action 2: Final Rejection (2024-04-18)
Rejection types: 103 - Obviousness

CLAIMS:
IN THE CLAIMS

The following listing of claims will replace all prior versions, and listings, of claims in the application.

1\. (Currently Amended) A fiber producing system, the system comprising:a housing having an inlet and an outlet;
one or more air pumps positioned in the housing;

a peristaltic pump positioned in the housing, the peristaltic pump being coupled to the inlet of the housing for receiving polymer solution into the peristaltic pump;
a manifold positioned at the outlet of the housing, wherein the manifold is coupled to an outlet of the peristaltic pump;
a nozzle positioned in the manifold, the nozzle being coupled to an outlet of the one or more air pumps, wherein the nozzle includes a convergent-shaped portion followed by a divergent-shaped portion to increase a velocity of air exiting an outlet of the nozzle; and a nosepiece positioned in the manifold and coupled to the outlet of the nozzle,wherein the nosepiece includes a die with one or more channels acting as individual passages, and wherein the channels are arranged in a flow of the air from the outlet of the nozzle inside the nosepiece such that the air is funneled around the polymer solution exiting the channels to for fibers as the polymer solution exits the nosepiece.

2\. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein the housing is a molded housing.

3\. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein the nozzle and the manifold are positioned in the housing.
4\. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein the housing includes a handle.

5\. (Previously Presented) The system of claim 1, further comprising a hopper coupled to the peristaltic pump.

6\. (Previously Presented) The system of claim 5, wherein the hopper is configured to provide the polymer solution to the peristaltic pump.

7\. (Previously Presented) The system of claim 1, wherein the peristaltic pump is configured to move the polymer solution into the manifold.

8\. (Cancelled).

9\. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein the channels are configured to extrude the polymer solution to form fibers during use.

10\. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the channels has a shape and size configured to provide fibers of a desired shape and size.

11\. (Previously Presented) The system of claim 1, further comprising a divider in at least one of the channels to divide the polymer solution and form multi-lumen fibers.

12\. (Original) The system of claim 1, further comprising a portable power source coupled to the pumps.

13\. (Currently Amended) A method of making fibers, comprising:providing a polymer solution to a peristaltic pump positioned in a housing;
generating a flow of air in the housing using an air pump positioned in the housing;
moving, using the peristaltic pump, the polymer solution into and through a nosepiece in a manifold in the housing, wherein the nosepiece includes a die having one or more channels;
moving, using the air pump, air into and through a nozzle in the manifold, wherein the nozzle includes a convergent-shaped
portion followed by a divergent-shaped portion that increases a velocity of the air exiting the nozzle; and
providing the air from the nozzle and through the nosepiece such that the air with the increased velocity funnels around the polymer solution exiting the channels in the nosepiece and fibers are formed as the polymer solution exits the nosepiece.

14\. (Previously Presented) The method of claim 13, wherein the produced fibers have a shape and size determined by a shape and size of the one or more channels in the nosepiece.

15\. (Original) The method of claim 13, wherein the produced fibers have a length greater than 1 micron.

16\. (Previously Presented) The method of claim 13, further comprising extruding the polymer solution through the one or more channels to produce the fibers.

17\. (Previously Presented) The method of claim 13, wherein providing the polymer solution include providing the polymer solution to a hopper coupled to the peristaltic pump.

18\. (Original) The method of claim 13, further comprising providing the produced fibers onto a surface.

19\. (Original) The method of claim 13, further comprising controlling a temperature of the housing to control one or more properties of the fibers.

20\. (Original) The method of claim 19, further comprising controlling the temperature using a heater positioned in the housing.

OFFICE ACTION:
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 .
Claims 1 and 13 have been amended by applicants.
Claim 8 has been canceled by applicants.
Claims 1-7 and 9-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/8/2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.  The applicants have amended the independent claims 1 and 13 with additional features.  The changes include the new limitation that the nozzle having a convergent shaped followed by a divergent shaped portion, and this particular design as argued by the applicants would differentiate from the teachings of the prior art references.  However, after further reconsideration, it is noted that the convergent-divergent nozzle designs are known for producing a venturi effect.  Furthermore, see in the Abramov (US 2019/0280561) reference teaching regarding this phenomena, see [0013, 0037, 0065, 0068, 0241], thus, it is known in the art regarding the venturi effect being formed by the nozzle designs in Wright, that the particular design utilizing the claimed features are seen in the Abramov teaching as known in the art.  The rejection of the claims are thus shown below reflecting this limitation and how it is known and applicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Thereby, the claims remain rejected based upon the prior art references despite the additional features presented by the applicants in the latest amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9-14, 16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikegaya (US 2020/0173057) in view of Wright (US 11207510) and Fong (US 2019/0292685) and Abramov (US 2019/00280561).
Ikegaya teaches of nozzle head 20 and having solvent storage 11, and gas ejection unit 13, and gas flow passage 26, and raw material flow passage 25, and in Figures 2-27 of various different arrangements of the nozzle head and in Figures 25-26 with plural flow passages, and further in another embodiment, see Figures 28-40, with an extruder device with cylinder 63 and supply pipe 68 for gas, with the nozzle head 70, and with the plural gas passages 76 and the raw material passages 75.
Thereby, Regarding claim 1, Ikegaya teaches of a fiber producing system, the system comprising:
one or more air pumps positioned in the system (inherently taught by the flow of the gas flow passage within the system to the nozzle in Ikegaya as a source of the air flow through the system);
a nozzle (see nozzle head 20) coupled to the one or more air pumps (inherently due to the gas flow passages 76);
a manifold coupled to the pump; and
a nosepiece enclosed in the manifold, wherein the nosepiece includes a die with one or more channels acting as individual passages for forming fibers as polymer solution exits the nosepiece (see teaching of the nozzle head with the different arrangements for the raw material passages 75, see Figs. 25-26 and 28-40 and wherein, the structure of Ikegaya would encompass the claimed nosepiece structure);
and of channel for air/gas flow 26/76, while raw material flow 25, 75 flow into said gas flow in formation of the fibers (see Figures), wherein, the feature would encompass the claimed “a die with one or more channels acting as individual passages, and wherein the channels are arranged in a flow of the air from the outlet of the nozzle inside the nosepiece such that the air is funneled around the polymer solution exiting the channels to form fibers as the polymer solution exits the nosepiece”.
Ikegaya does not specifically teach of the particularly claimed convergent, divergent nozzle design, of the particular positioning all the elements within a housing.
Regarding all the elements being positioned in a housing and of the pump within the manifold/housing, Wright teaches of handheld applicator device 100 with nozzle 60 and cartridge 50 (for solution reservoir), and with pump P that includes piston pump, pneumatics micro pump acting with a solenoid, see Col. 19, lines 16-30. The device having a housing 10, and grip 15 (handle) and further the teaching of inlet and outlet stems from the source of the material as inlet and outlet from the nozzle.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Ikegawa with the arrangement of the features, pump, and venturi nozzle design of Wright into a single housing/manifold thereby allowing for a complete handheld system in forming of fibers.  The arrangement being further obvious to one skilled in the art under KSR in combining prior art elements of Ikegaya according to known methods, in this case of Wright, to yield predictable results, of a handheld system.
Regarding the use of a peristaltic pump, Fong teaches of the use of a spinneret and electrospinning system in forming fibers.  Wherein, the solution is provided from the reservoir via a peristaltic pump, see [0096], that further the pump can be either a positive displacement pump or peristaltic pump, [0095].  Further, Wright teaches a variety of pumps used for transporting the raw materials within the system.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the pumping of the solution of Ikegaya in view of Wright with the use of a peristaltic pump as taught by Fong as a known alternate pump for use in the system, further, under KSR, this is seen as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding the convergent and then divergent portions of the nozzle, the Wright reference teaches of the nozzle forming a venturi effect.  Wherein, the formation of a venturi effect via nozzle includes the concept design as seen in Abramov, wherein, there is a convergent-divergent nozzle in forming a jet-effect, also known as venturi effect as it allows for increased velocity to occur, see [0013, 0037, 0065, 0068, 0241].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modify the nozzle design of Ikegaya in view of Wright and Fong with the convergent-divergent nozzle as taught by Abramov as a known nozzle design in the formation of the venturi effect in the flow.  This is also seen under KSR regarding combining prior art elements (in this case of the Abramov nozzle design for venturi effect) according to known methods (see the modified Ikegaya with the teaching of venturi effect via nozzle design of Wright) to yield predictable results.
Re: claim 2 (upon 1), wherein the housing is a molded housing. See housing of Wright, and further, a molded housing is a known type of forming such particularly when the housing is formed from a plastic material which is a known type of material used in constructing said elements.
Re: claim 3 (upon 1), wherein the nozzle and the manifold are positioned in the housing, see teaching of Wright of the nozzle and manifold that are within the housing, particularly in the arrangement to be handheld.
Re: claim 4 (upon 1), wherein the housing includes a handle.  See grip 15 in Wright.
Re: claim 7 (upon 1), wherein the peristaltic pump is configured to move the polymer solution into the manifold.  See teaching of Fong.
Re: claim 9 (upon 1), wherein the channels are configured to extrude the polymer solution to form fibers during use.  See teaching of Ikegaya.
Re: claim 10 (upon 1), wherein at least one of the channels has a shape and size configured to provide fibers of a desired shape and size.  This is a broad interpretation and it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the channels of Ikegaya in view of Wright, Fong and Abramov as a change in size and shape for the desired parameters in effecting the fibers formed, in particular see teaching of Wright, Col. 26, lines 19-25, see teaching of varying of nozzle size.
Re: claim 11 (upon 1), further comprising a divider in at least one of the channels to divide the polymer solution and form multi-lumen fibers.  See teaching in Ikegaya particularly of the plural channels formed for the raw material channels which correspond to the claimed channels.
Re: claim 12 (upon 1), further comprising a portable power source coupled to the pumps.  See teaching of batteries B in Wright.
Re: claim 13, see teaching of the above of Ikegaya in view of Wright Fong, and Abramov teaches the claimed structure of claim 1, wherein, claim 13 is in regards to a method of making fibers and wherein the steps include the elements that would be encompassed by the teachings of references that have been applied to claim 1.
Re: claim 14 (upon 13), wherein the produced fibers have a shape and size determined by a shape and size of the one or more channels in the nosepiece.  This teaching would be a result of the channels that are taught in the teaching of the prior art references.
Re: claim 15 (upon 13), wherein the produced fibers have a length greater than 1 micron. See teaching of Wright that includes forming particles that range from 0.5-20 micron, see Wright, Col. 6, lines 18-19.
Re: claim 16 (upon 13), further comprising extruding the polymer solution through the one or more channels to produce the fibers.  See the claimed teachings as the polymer solution would form the fibers as it exits from the channels.
Re: claim 18 (upon 13), further comprising providing the produced fibers onto a surface.  See teaching of the references, particularly in the use of the device in forming fibers, see also Wright regarding site which would be the claimed surface, see Col. 26, lines 22, and of treatment site.
Re: claim 19 (upon 13), further comprising controlling a temperature of the housing to control one or more properties of the fibers.  See teaching by Ikegaya with temperature control, see [0065], that includes for both raw material temperature control function and for gas temperature control function, see [0133, 0134].
Re: claim 20 (upon 19), further comprising controlling the temperature using a heater positioned in the housing.  See teaching of heater 64 in Ikegaya, [0106, 0113].
Claim(s) 5, 6, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikegaya in view of Wright, Fong, and Abramov as applied to claim 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Fournier (US 2019/0390374).
Re: claim 5 (upon 1), further comprising a hopper coupled to the peristaltic peristatic pump.
Re: claim 6 (upon 5), wherein the hopper is configured to provide the polymer solution to the peristaltic pump.
Re: claim 17 (upon 13), wherein providing the polymer solution include providing the polymer solution to a hopper coupled to the peristaltic pump.
The references do not teach of a hopper coupled to the peristaltic pump.
In regards to the hopper, Fournier, see [0292] teaches of feeding hopper that includes peristaltic pump.  Wherein, the concept of the polymer supply being from a hopper and further associated with a pump would have been obvious as a known alternate configuration in supplying the polymer solution further into the system.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Ikegaya in view of Wright, Fong, and Abramov with the additional hopper and associated peristaltic pump as taught by Fournier as under KSR as a known alternate configuration that can be applied in supplying polymer solution from Fournier within a system of Ikegaya in view of Wright, Fong, and Abramov with an expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.  See attached PTO-892 form, and of particular note with teachings by the references concerning the converging and diverging sections of the nozzle:
Yoneda (US 4285318, see abstract, and Figs. 1 and 3.
Mosseri (US 4282637), see abstract and Figs. 1 and 2.
Yelveington (US 10654009), see Figs. 1-3, and Col. 3, lines 33-47.
Davison (US 10492387), see Figs. 4 and 8 and Col. 9, lines 45-60.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.  Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.  See MPEP § 706.07(a).  Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.  In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action.  In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKS
Applicant is in receipt of the Final Office Action mailed April 18, 2024.
Claims 1-7 and 9-20 were pending. Claims 1 and 13 have been amended. Support for the amendments is found at least in FIGS. 2-4 along with the accompanying description at least in paragraphs [0019]-[0030]. No new matter has been added.
Reconsideration of the present case is respectfully requested in view of the following remarks.
Section 103 Re
j
ections:
The Office Action rejects claims 1-4, 7, 9-16, and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over lkegaya (US 2020/0173057) in view of Wright (US 11207510) and Fong (US 2019/0292685) and Abramov (US2019/0280561). The Office Action rejects claims 5, 6, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over lkegaya in view of Wright, Fong, and Abramov as applied to claim 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Fournier (US 2019/0390374). Applicant respectfully disagrees with these rejections.
In order to reject a claim as obvious, the Examiner has the burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Warner et al., 379 F.2d 1011, 154 USPQ 173, 177-178 (C.C.P.A. 1967). To establish prima facie obviousness of a claimed invention,
all the claim limitations
must be taught or suggested by the prior art. In re Royka, 490 F.2d 981, 180 U.S.P.Q. 580 (C.C.P.A. 1974), MPEP §2143.03.
Claim 1 recites, in part:
a nozzle positioned in the manifold, the nozzle being coupled to an outlet of
the one or more air pumps, wherein the nozzle includes a convergent-shaped portion followed by a divergent-shaped portion to increase a velocity of air exiting
an outlet of the nozzle; and
a nosepiece positioned in the manifold and coupled to the outlet of the
nozzle, wherein the nosepiece includes a die with one or more channels acting as individual passages for flow of the polymer solution and the air, and wherein the channels are arranged in a flow of the air from the outlet of the nozzle inside the nosepiece such that the air is funneled around the polymer solution to move the polymer solution out of the channels and form fibers as the polymer solution exits
the nosepiece.
Claim 13 recites, in part:
moving, using the air pump, air into and through a nozzle in the manifold,
wherein the nozzle includes a convergent-shaped portion followed by a divergent- shaped portion that increases a velocity of the air exiting the nozzle; and
providing the air from the nozzle and through the nosepiece such that the
air with the increased velocity funnels around the polymer solution in the channels to move the polymer solution out of the channels in the nosepiece and form fibers
as the polymer solution exits the nosepiece.
The cited art does not appear to teach or suggest at least the above-quoted features of the claims, in combination with the other features of the claims. Specifically, beginning with Ikegaya, Ikegaya teaches separate passages for air/gas flow (e.g., "gas flow passage 26" or "gas flow passage 76") and raw material flow ((e.g., "raw material flow passage 25" or "raw material flow passage 75"). Further, Ikegaya teaches that the solvent with raw material flow meets the gas flow outside the openings to be carried by the gas flow for elongation and formation of the fibers. For instance, Ikegaya states:
The solvent discharged from the raw material flow passage 25 reaches at the opening of the gas flow passage 26 through the raw material flow groove 24 a, meets the gas flow ejected from the gas flow passage 26 with the angle a, and is carried out in the front direction while being elongated, so that the nanofibers are
manufactured.
(Ikegaya, paragraph [0101]).
Accordingly, Ikegaya does not teach or suggest the feature of "a nosepiece" where air enters the nosepiece from the nozzle with increased velocity, as claimed. In the claimed features, in the nosepiece, the air moves the polymer solution through the passages/channels of the nosepiece while also moving the polymer solution out of the nosepiece to form the fibers with properties based on the design of the channels in the nosepiece. Applicant specifically notes that in Applicant's claimed invention, the increased velocity air from the nozzle is used to move the polymer solution through the channels and the fibers are generated because of the air-supported movement of the polymer solution. As described above, Ikegaya relies on contact between gas (e.g., air) and the raw material
outside of the device.
Accordingly, Ikegaya does not teach or suggest at least the above-quoted features of claims 1 and 13, in combination with the other features of the claim.
Applicant further notes that the combination of features recited in Applicant's claimed invention (e.g., the combination and arrangement of claimed components of the device for producing fibers) provide specific advantages described throughout the current application. For instance, Applicant's claimed invention provides a hand held apparatus for forming fibers and directing the formed fibers onto a specific surface (e.g., a surface wound). The combination of features in Applicant's claimed invention allow the hand held apparatus to form the fibers without any rotating parts and without any electric fields. For instance, Applicant's Specification states: "It should be noted that there are no rotating parts in the disclosed embodiment of system 100 and thus there are no high electric fields such as is typically needed in centrifugal and electrospinning methods." (Paragraph [0019]). Accordingly, Applicant's claimed invention has advantages of not having rotating parts and not implementing electric fields that are not discussed or recognized by the cited art.  These advantages are achieved by the described combination and specific arrangement of the various components recited in Applicant's claims.
Some of the cited art discusses implementation of techniques specifically cited as being disadvantageous by the current application. For example, Wright, while teaching a venturi nozzle design, teaches that the venturi nozzle design is used in a system that requires electrostatic charging of the treatment solution. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have no motivation to implement the teachings of Wright, which involve electrostatic charging, in order to produce a device of Applicant's claimed invention, which clearly is designed to operate without any electric fields, as described above. Further, Fong, while teaching use of a peristaltic pump, teaches the use of the peristaltic pump in an environment that clearly involves electric fields - electrospinning. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have no motivation to implement the teachings of Fond, which involves electrospinning, in order to produce a device of Applicant's claimed invention, which clearly is designed to operate without any electric fields, as described above.
For at least these reasons, Wright and Fong do not overcome the above-described deficiencies in Ikegaya. Abramov is merely cited as an example of optimizing designs of convergent-divergent nozzles that increase velocity of fluid flowing through the nozzles. Abramov
has no teaching or suggestion related to the production of fibers. Thus, Abramov cannot, on its own, overcome the deficiencies in Ikegaya, Wright, and Fong.
For at least the above reasons, Applicant submits that the cited does not teach or suggest at least the above-quoted combinations of features in the claims. Accordingly, Applicant submits that claims 1, 13, and the claims dependent thereon are patentable over the cited art.
CONCLUSION

NEXT OFFICE ACTION: 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 .
Claims 1 and 13 have been amended by applicants.
Claim 8 has been canceled by applicants.
Claims 1-7 and 9-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/18/2024 have been fully considered after further reconsideration and updated search, and wherein the arguments are unpersuasive in light of the latest reference.  The applicants have amended the independent claims 1 and 13 with additional features.  The arguments by the applicants have focused upon the features of the nozzle and of the convergent and divergent shaped portions and of the flow of the polymer solution and of the air.  The argument concerning the device operation of Ikegaya by the applicant is noted.
The applicants have made argument concerning the Wright teaching and how it lacks motivation to combine.  After further reconsideration and additional searching, it is noted that the Weigel reference is relevant to the teachings of Ikegaya.  As shown below, Weigel teaches further of the venturi effect in forming the filaments, and wherein, provides clearer teaching of the convergence and divergence portions provided at the nozzle portion.  The claims are rejected as shown below based upon this combination.
Additionally, the concepts of Wright remains relevant in regards of forming a device in a portable handheld device with the housing taught by Wright.  The argument concerning the electrostatic of Wright is noted, but the device of Wright being arranged into a handheld device is applicable to the teachings of Ikegaya in view of Weigel particularly in regards to the features of the device being within a handheld molded housing and in regards of a portable power source (or battery), wherein, this particular concept remains relevant and applicable in regards to the teachings and combination.
After further reconsideration, the claims are rejected as shown below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 9, 11, 13-14, 16, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikegaya (US 2020/0173057) in view Weigel (US 2008/0038979), and further in view of Fong (US 2019/0292685).
Ikegaya teaches of nozzle head 20 and having solvent storage 11, and gas ejection unit 13, and gas flow passage 26, and raw material flow passage 25, and in Figures 2-27 of various different arrangements of the nozzle head and in Figures 25-26 with plural flow passages, and further in another embodiment, see Figures 28-40, with an extruder device with cylinder 63 and supply pipe 68 for gas, with the nozzle head 70, and with the plural gas passages 76 and the raw material passages 75.
Thereby, Regarding claim 1, Ikegaya teaches of a fiber producing system, the system comprising:
one or more air pumps positioned in the system (inherently taught by the flow of the gas flow passage within the system to the nozzle in Ikegaya as a source of the air flow through the system);
a nozzle (see nozzle head 20) coupled to the one or more air pumps (inherently due to the gas flow passages 76);
a manifold coupled to the pump; and
a nosepiece enclosed in the manifold, wherein the nosepiece includes a die with one or more channels acting as individual passages for forming fibers as polymer solution exits the nosepiece (see teaching of the nozzle head with the different arrangements for the raw material passages 75, see Figs. 25-26 and 28-40 and wherein, the structure of Ikegaya would encompass the claimed nosepiece structure);
and of channel for air/gas flow 26/76, while raw material flow 25, 75 flow into said gas flow in formation of the fibers (see Figures), wherein, the feature would encompass the claimed “a die with one or more channels acting as individual passages, and wherein the channels are arranged in a flow of the air from the outlet of the nozzle inside the nosepiece such that the air is funneled around the polymer solution exiting the channels to form fibers as the polymer solution exits the nosepiece”.
Ikegaya does not specifically teach of the particularly claimed convergent, divergent nozzle design, of the particular positioning all the elements within a housing.
Regarding the use of a peristaltic pump, Fong teaches of the use of a spinneret and electrospinning system in forming fibers.  Wherein, the solution is provided from the reservoir via a peristaltic pump, see [0096], that further the pump can be either a positive displacement pump or peristaltic pump, [0095].  Further, Wright teaches a variety of pumps used for transporting the raw materials within the system.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the pumping of the solution of Ikegaya in view of Wright with the use of a peristaltic pump as taught by Fong as a known alternate pump for use in the system, further, under KSR, this is seen as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding the convergent and then divergent portions of the nozzle, the Wright reference teaches of the nozzle forming a venturi effect.  In analogous prior art in the related teaching of forming filaments, the Weigel reference teaches in Fig. 2, see [0035], with the funnel in forming a venturi nozzle, and includes a funnel portion, which would encompass the claimed convergence portion.  Wherein, the divergence occurs via at the end 5.  Here, the fibre inlet 1 and further opening 3 provides for air.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modify the nozzle design of Ikegaya in view of Wright and Fong with the convergent-divergent nozzle in forming a venturi as taught by Weigel as known structures in forming fibers.  This is also seen under KSR regarding combining prior art elements (in this case of the Weigel nozzle design for venturi effect) according to known methods (see the modified Ikegaya with the teaching of venturi effect via nozzle design of Wright) to yield predictable results.
Re: claim 7 (upon 1), wherein the peristaltic pump is configured to move the polymer solution into the manifold.  See teaching of Fong.
Re: claim 9 (upon 1), wherein the channels are configured to extrude the polymer solution to form fibers during use.  See teaching of Ikegaya.
Re: claim 11 (upon 1), further comprising a divider in at least one of the channels to divide the polymer solution and form multi-lumen fibers.  See teaching in Ikegaya particularly of the plural channels formed for the raw material channels which correspond to the claimed channels.
Re: claim 13, see teaching of the above of Ikegaya in view of Wright, Fong, and Weigel Abramov teaches the claimed structure of claim 1, wherein, claim 13 is in regards to a method of making fibers and wherein the steps include the elements that would be encompassed by the teachings of references that have been applied to claim 1.
Re: claim 14 (upon 13), wherein the produced fibers have a shape and size determined by a shape and size of the one or more channels in the nosepiece.  This teaching would be a result of the channels that are taught in the teaching of the prior art references.
Re: claim 16 (upon 13), further comprising extruding the polymer solution through the one or more channels to produce the fibers.  See the claimed teachings as the polymer solution would form the fibers as it exits from the channels.
Re: claim 19 (upon 13), further comprising controlling a temperature of the housing to control one or more properties of the fibers.  See teaching by Ikegaya with temperature control, see [0065], that includes for both raw material temperature control function and for gas temperature control function, see [0133, 0134].
Re: claim 20 (upon 19), further comprising controlling the temperature using a heater positioned in the housing.  See teaching of heater 64 in Ikegaya, [0106, 0113].
Claim(s) 2-4, 10, 12, 15, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikegaya in view of Weigel, and Fong, as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Wright (US 11207510).
Ikegaya, Weigel, and Fong teaches the claimed invention as shown above.
Regarding all the elements being positioned in a housing and of the pump within the manifold/housing, Wright teaches of handheld applicator device 100 with nozzle 60 and cartridge 50 (for solution reservoir), and with pump P that includes piston pump, pneumatics micro pump acting with a solenoid, see Col. 19, lines 16-30. The device having a housing 10, and grip 15 (handle) and further the teaching of inlet and outlet stems from the source of the material as inlet and outlet from the nozzle.
Re: claim 2 (upon 1), wherein the housing is a molded housing.
The modified Ikegaya reference does not specifically teach of the claimed housing.
See housing of Wright, and further, a molded housing is a known type of forming such particularly when the housing is formed from a plastic material which is a known type of material used in constructing said elements.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the system of modified Ikegawa with the arrangement of the features, pump, and venturi nozzle design of Wright into a single housing/manifold thereby allowing for a complete handheld system in forming of fibers.  The arrangement being further obvious to one skilled in the art under KSR in combining prior art elements of Ikegaya according to known methods, in this case of Wright, to yield predictable results, of a handheld system as it allows for a portable device.
Re: claim 3 (upon 1), wherein the nozzle and the manifold are positioned in the housing, see teaching of Wright of the nozzle and manifold that are within the housing, particularly in the arrangement to be handheld.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the system of modified Ikegawa with the arrangement of the features into a single housing/manifold as taught by Wright thereby allowing for a complete handheld system in forming of fibers.  The arrangement being further obvious to one skilled in the art under KSR in combining prior art elements of Ikegaya according to known methods, in this case of Wright, to yield predictable results, of a handheld system as it allows for a portable device.
Re: claim 4 (upon 1), wherein the housing includes a handle.  See grip 15 in Wright.  Whereby, the teaching and combination is similar to the teaching for claim 3.
Re: claim 10 (upon 1), wherein at least one of the channels has a shape and size configured to provide fibers of a desired shape and size.  This is a broad interpretation and it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the channels of Ikegaya in view of Wright, Fong as a change in size and shape for the desired parameters in effecting the fibers formed, in particular see teaching of Wright, Col. 26, lines 19-25, see teaching of varying of nozzle size.
Re: claim 12 (upon 1), further comprising a portable power source coupled to the pumps.  See teaching of batteries B in Wright.  See teaching of the modification as set forth in claim 3 and further, the use of a portable power source taught in Wright.
Re: claim 15 (upon 13), wherein the produced fibers have a length greater than 1 micron. See teaching of Wright that includes forming particles that range from 0.5-20 micron, see Wright, Col. 6, lines 18-19.
Wherein, the claimed fibers formed as taught by Wright is noted and it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the system of modified Ikegawa with the fiber sizing of Wright in forming the desired product size.  The arrangement being further obvious to one skilled in the art under KSR in combining prior art elements of Ikegaya according to known methods, in this case of Wright, to yield predictable results.
Re: claim 18 (upon 13), further comprising providing the produced fibers onto a surface.  See teaching of the references, particularly in the use of the device in forming fibers, see also Wright regarding site which would be the claimed surface, see Col. 26, lines 22, and of treatment site.
Claim(s) 5, 6, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikegaya in view of Weigel, and Fong, as applied to claim 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Fournier (US 2019/0390374).
Re: claim 5 (upon 1), further comprising a hopper coupled to the peristaltic peristatic pump.
Re: claim 6 (upon 5), wherein the hopper is configured to provide the polymer solution to the peristaltic pump.
Re: claim 17 (upon 13), wherein providing the polymer solution include providing the polymer solution to a hopper coupled to the peristaltic pump.
The references do not teach of a hopper coupled to the peristaltic pump.
In regards to the hopper, Fournier, see [0292] teaches of feeding hopper that includes peristaltic pump.  Wherein, the concept of the polymer supply being from a hopper and further associated with a pump would have been obvious as a known alternate configuration in supplying the polymer solution further into the system.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Ikegaya in view of Weigel, and Fong with the additional hopper and associated peristaltic pump as taught by Fournier as under KSR as a known alternate configuration that can be applied in supplying polymer solution from Fournier within a system of Ikegaya in view of Weigel, and Fong with an expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.  See attached PTO-892 form, and of particular note with teachings by the references concerning the converging and diverging sections of the nozzle:
Yoneda (US 4285318, see abstract, and Figs. 1 and 3.
Mosseri (US 4282637), see abstract and Figs. 1 and 2.
Yelveington (US 10654009), see Figs. 1-3, and Col. 3, lines 33-47.
Davison (US 10492387), see Figs. 4 and 8 and Col. 9, lines 45-60.

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US10492387B1: [content unavailable]
Ref US10654009B1: [content unavailable]
Ref US4282637A: Claims:
We claim: 1. A Venturi type nozzle for texturizing yarns, said nozzle comprising:a hollow body having therein an axial cavity; an elongated needle extending into said cavity, said needle having therethrough an axial bore for the passage of yarn, said needle having a head end having an inner orifice and an outer surface including a first convergent frustoconical surface; a plug connected to said body, said plug having therethrough a convergent-divergent Venturi passage including a second convergent frusto-conical surface facing said first frusto-conical surface and spaced therefrom to define a substantially frusto-conical chamber, a downstream divergent frusto-conical surface, and a minimum cross-section separating said convergent and divergent frusto-conical surfaces; the conicities of said first and second frusto-conical surfaces being equal; a lateral passage extending into said body for supplying thereinto a gas; passage means, between the interior of said body and the exterior of said needle, for directing gas supplied through said lateral passage to and through said frusto-conical chamber and through said minimum cross-section and said divergent frusto-conical surface, to thereby withdraw yarn from said orifice of said needle, said passage means being arranged symmetrically with respect to the longitudinal axis of said needle from said lateral passage to the upstream end of said frusto-conical chamber; the ratio of the axial distance between said first and second convergent frusto-conical surfaces, measured on a straight line parallel to said longitudinal axis of said needle, to the diameter of said needle orifice being not greater than 0.5; and said needle including a segment having a polygonal cross-section including vertices engaging a circular cylindrical wall defining said cavity of said body and flat surfaces spaced from said cylindrical wall and defining therebetween elongated chambers which at least partially define said passage means, the total free cross-sectional area of said elongated chambers, through which area said gas flows, being slightly larger than the sum of the areas of said needle orifice and said minimum cross-section. 2. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein said ratio is not greater than 0.4. 3. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein the ratio of the diameter of said minimum cross-section to said diameter of said needle orifice is not greater than 1.5. 4. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein said outer surface of said needle head end is cut off to provide a portion of a plane surface lying on a plane parallel to a plane tangent to the original frusto-conical surface. 5. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein said needle is provided with means for displacing said needle axially with respect to said body and for fixing said needle in a desired axial position with respect to said body, corresponding to a predetermined said axial distance between said first and second convergent frusto-conical surfaces. 6. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein said plug is provided with deflector means, facing the outlet orifice of said Venturi passage, for deflecting a stream of air and yarn issuing therefrom in a direction perpendicular to said axis. 7. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, further comprising means for assuring air-tightness between said needle and said body upstream of said lateral passage and between said plug and said body. 8. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, for yarns having deniers smaller than 1000, wherein said axial distance between said first and second convergent frusto-conical surfaces is between 0.2 and 0.5 mm. 9. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, for yarns having deniers between 1000 and 3000, wherein said axial distance between said first and second convergent frusto-conical surfaces is not greater than 1 mm. 10. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, for yarns having deniers not larger than 1000, wherein said diameter of said orifice of said needle is approximately 1 mm. 11. A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, for yarns having deniers above 1000, wherein said diameter of said orifice of said needle is approximately 1.5 mm.
A Venturi type nozzle for texturizing yarns, said nozzle comprising:a hollow body having therein an axial cavity; an elongated needle extending into said cavity, said needle having therethrough an axial bore for the passage of yarn, said needle having a head end having an inner orifice and an outer surface including a first convergent frustoconical surface; a plug connected to said body, said plug having therethrough a convergent-divergent Venturi passage including a second convergent frusto-conical surface facing said first frusto-conical surface and spaced therefrom to define a substantially frusto-conical chamber, a downstream divergent frusto-conical surface, and a minimum cross-section separating said convergent and divergent frusto-conical surfaces; the conicities of said first and second frusto-conical surfaces being equal; a lateral passage extending into said body for supplying thereinto a gas; passage means, between the interior of said body and the exterior of said needle, for directing gas supplied through said lateral passage to and through said frusto-conical chamber and through said minimum cross-section and said divergent frusto-conical surface, to thereby withdraw yarn from said orifice of said needle, said passage means being arranged symmetrically with respect to the longitudinal axis of said needle from said lateral passage to the upstream end of said frusto-conical chamber; the ratio of the axial distance between said first and second convergent frusto-conical surfaces, measured on a straight line parallel to said longitudinal axis of said needle, to the diameter of said needle orifice being not greater than 0.5; and said needle including a segment having a polygonal cross-section including vertices engaging a circular cylindrical wall defining said cavity of said body and flat surfaces spaced from said cylindrical wall and defining therebetween elongated chambers which at least partially define said passage means, the total free cross-sectional area of said elongated chambers, through which area said gas flows, being slightly larger than the sum of the areas of said needle orifice and said minimum cross-section.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein said ratio is not greater than 0.4.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein the ratio of the diameter of said minimum cross-section to said diameter of said needle orifice is not greater than 1.5.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein said outer surface of said needle head end is cut off to provide a portion of a plane surface lying on a plane parallel to a plane tangent to the original frusto-conical surface.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein said needle is provided with means for displacing said needle axially with respect to said body and for fixing said needle in a desired axial position with respect to said body, corresponding to a predetermined said axial distance between said first and second convergent frusto-conical surfaces.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, wherein said plug is provided with deflector means, facing the outlet orifice of said Venturi passage, for deflecting a stream of air and yarn issuing therefrom in a direction perpendicular to said axis.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, further comprising means for assuring air-tightness between said needle and said body upstream of said lateral passage and between said plug and said body.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, for yarns having deniers smaller than 1000, wherein said axial distance between said first and second convergent frusto-conical surfaces is between 0.2 and 0.5 mm.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, for yarns having deniers between 1000 and 3000, wherein said axial distance between said first and second convergent frusto-conical surfaces is not greater than 1 mm.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, for yarns having deniers not larger than 1000, wherein said diameter of said orifice of said needle is approximately 1 mm.
A nozzle as claimed in claim 1, for yarns having deniers above 1000, wherein said diameter of said orifice of said needle is approximately 1.5 mm.
Ref US4285318A: Claims:
What is claimed is: 1. In an internal combustion engine, an exhaust gas recirculation system comprising:means defining a fluid flow channel connecting an exhaust passage of the engine to an induction passage of the engine to recirculate a portion of the exhaust gas therethrough; a converging-diverging nozzle circular in cross section disposed at an intermediate section of said channel for flowing recirculated exhaust gas therethrough, said nozzle having a throat and having a converging section and a diverging section shaped such that the velocity of the recirculated exhaust gas is sonic at the throat of said nozzle when a pressure difference between the entrance and exit pressures of said nozzle exceeds a predetermined magnitude; a conical valve member in said nozzle coaxially therewith to extend through said throat; the surface of said valve element and inner surfaces of the diverging section defining therebetween an angle from about 7 to 10 degrees in longitudinal section; and means for supporting and moving said valve member axially thereby to vary the cross-sectional area of said channel at said throat. 2. An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the semivertical angle of the conical valve member is 30 degrees at the maximum, and the converging section angle and diverging section angle of said nozzle are 90 degrees at the maximum and 10 degrees at the maximum, respectively. 3. An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said means for moving said valve element are constituted of: (a) a carburetor associated with the engine; (b) a valve actuator having a flexible diaphragm arranged therein perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of said valve member and forming therein a vacuum chamber, said diaphragm defining a wall of said vacuum chamber; (c) a vacuum control device having a housing forming therein a first chamber communicating with said vacuum chamber, a second chamber communicating with the atmosphere and a third chamber communicating with the venturi section of said carburetor, a first flexible diaphragm having a port and partitioning said first chamber from said second chamber, a second flexible diaphragm partitioning said second chamber from said third chamber and having a larger effective area than said first flexible diaphragm, a rigid member interconnecting said first and second diaphragms, a vacuum reservoir having a pipe extending therefrom to said port, and a valve means for selectively closing and opening said port such that said first chamber communicates with said vacuum reservoir and with said second chamber when said first flexible diaphragm is deflected towards said second chamber and towards said first chamber, respectively. 4. An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said valve member is disposed such that said valve member is smaller in diameter at said throat than at the entrance to the converging section of said nozzle. 5. An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a wiper member disposed in said channel at a location out of and close to the entrance to said nozzle in position relative a circumferential surface of said valve member wiped by said wiper member when said valve member moves axially. 6. An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 5, wherein said wiper member is a tapered member having an arc-shaped cross section, the system further comprising support means for constantly pushing said tapered member against said surface of said valve member, said support comprising means allowing said tapered member to move normal to the longitudinal axis of said valve member when said valve member moves axially. 7. An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 5, wherein said wiper member is of a resilient and lubricating material. 8. An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 7, wherein said wiper member is an angular member having a plurality of radial slits spaced in a circumferential direction and terminating at the periphery of a central hole thereof.
In an internal combustion engine, an exhaust gas recirculation system comprising:means defining a fluid flow channel connecting an exhaust passage of the engine to an induction passage of the engine to recirculate a portion of the exhaust gas therethrough; a converging-diverging nozzle circular in cross section disposed at an intermediate section of said channel for flowing recirculated exhaust gas therethrough, said nozzle having a throat and having a converging section and a diverging section shaped such that the velocity of the recirculated exhaust gas is sonic at the throat of said nozzle when a pressure difference between the entrance and exit pressures of said nozzle exceeds a predetermined magnitude; a conical valve member in said nozzle coaxially therewith to extend through said throat; the surface of said valve element and inner surfaces of the diverging section defining therebetween an angle from about 7 to 10 degrees in longitudinal section; and means for supporting and moving said valve member axially thereby to vary the cross-sectional area of said channel at said throat.
An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the semivertical angle of the conical valve member is 30 degrees at the maximum, and the converging section angle and diverging section angle of said nozzle are 90 degrees at the maximum and 10 degrees at the maximum, respectively.
An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said means for moving said valve element are constituted of: (a) a carburetor associated with the engine; (b) a valve actuator having a flexible diaphragm arranged therein perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of said valve member and forming therein a vacuum chamber, said diaphragm defining a wall of said vacuum chamber; (c) a vacuum control device having a housing forming therein a first chamber communicating with said vacuum chamber, a second chamber communicating with the atmosphere and a third chamber communicating with the venturi section of said carburetor, a first flexible diaphragm having a port and partitioning said first chamber from said second chamber, a second flexible diaphragm partitioning said second chamber from said third chamber and having a larger effective area than said first flexible diaphragm, a rigid member interconnecting said first and second diaphragms, a vacuum reservoir having a pipe extending therefrom to said port, and a valve means for selectively closing and opening said port such that said first chamber communicates with said vacuum reservoir and with said second chamber when said first flexible diaphragm is deflected towards said second chamber and towards said first chamber, respectively.
An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said valve member is disposed such that said valve member is smaller in diameter at said throat than at the entrance to the converging section of said nozzle.
An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a wiper member disposed in said channel at a location out of and close to the entrance to said nozzle in position relative a circumferential surface of said valve member wiped by said wiper member when said valve member moves axially.
An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 5, wherein said wiper member is a tapered member having an arc-shaped cross section, the system further comprising support means for constantly pushing said tapered member against said surface of said valve member, said support comprising means allowing said tapered member to move normal to the longitudinal axis of said valve member when said valve member moves axially.
An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 5, wherein said wiper member is of a resilient and lubricating material.
An exhaust gas recirculation system as claimed in claim 7, wherein said wiper member is an angular member having a plurality of radial slits spaced in a circumferential direction and terminating at the periphery of a central hole thereof.
Ref US20190280561A1: Claims:
A method for computational fluid dynamics; said method for computational fluid dynamics comprising a computational analysis basic principle, providing for a digital approximation of a space by a virtual spatial mesh partitioned into non-overlapping quantization cells, thereby each said non-overlapping quantization cell occupies a volume bordered by imaginary boundaries; wherein said space is filled with a fluid matter composed of moving and inter-acting molecules, wherein motion of the molecules comprises two components: the Brownian random motion and a motion in a prevalent direction; wherein a set of interrelated terms being defined as follows: (a) a molecular fluid is defined as said fluid matter composed of moving and inter-acting molecules; (b) a small portion is defined as a portion of said molecular fluid occupying said non-overlapping quantization cell; (c) an excluded volume is defined as a volume, excluded by presence of molecules in the van der Waals theory of said molecular fluid; (d) a stationary wall is defined as a stationary impermeable surface; (e) wall-fluid molecular interaction van der Waals forces are defined as molecular inter-attraction forces between said stationary wall and fluid matter molecules, wherein said wall-fluid molecular interaction van der Waals forces being at least one of phobic-repulsive forces, directed inward said small portion, inert to the molecules of said fluid matter, and sticking attractive forces, directed outward said small portion; (f) an inert wall is defined as a kind of said stationary wall being hypothetically inert to said fluid matter molecules; (g) a stationary body corpus is defined as a space-portion bordered by said stationary walls; (h) a flow is defined as a motion of said molecular fluid, wherein the flow is characterized by the following spatially distributed parameters: three components of velocity-vector, indicated by u, related to the molecules motion in the prevalent direction and defined as a velocity-vector of said small portion motion relative to said stationary body corpus; wherein the absolute value of said velocity-vector u equals u, and, when measured in Mach numbers, equals M; absolute temperature, indicated by T, defined by the molecules Brownian random motion, according to the kinetic theory of matter, as a measure proportional to the average molecular kinetic energy of said fluid matter molecules Brownian random motion, inner-static-pressure, indicated by P in , defined as a measure of a cumulative impact effect caused by of said fluid matter molecules Brownian random motion, according to the kinetic theory of matter, and density, indicated by Ï, defined as a measure of concentration and mass of said fluid matter molecules, according to the kinetic theory of matter, said density equal to said molecular fluid mass per unit volume; (i) a steady-state flow is defined as the flow characterized by said spatially distributed parameters being constant in time; (j) a hypothetical ideal gas is defined, according to the kinetic theory of matter, as said molecular fluid such that inter-molecular forces are negligible and said excluded volume is inessential; (k) a stationary-small-portion is defined as said small portion, being static relative to said stationary body corpus; (l) a moving-small-portion is defined as said small portion, moving with the velocity-vector u relative to at least one of said stationary body corpus and the zero average Browni
[Truncated to input limit]