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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/24/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7 are pending. Claims 2,5-6 are cancelled.
Claim 1 is amended in the response filed 2/24/2026.
Support for Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 is found in original claim 6.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner notes the claim 1 preamble “a carbon fiber treatment agent precursor finishing agent” does not limit the structure of the composition. Examiner’s position is supported in Applicant’s specification [0002] and as noted in the Pre-Appeal Brief Conference Request page 8, paragraph 1, noting Applicants’ Background, “a carbon fiber precursor treatment agent is used at times on the carbon fiber precursor to suppress agglutination or fusion among fibers that occurs in the carbon fiber manufacturing process.” (see Applicants’ specification, para. [0002]).
Response to Amendment
The rejection of claims 1, 3-4, 6-7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (JP4817685B2) Google Patents translation is maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s urge the claimed amino modified silicone smoothing agent is distinct from the aromatic polycarbonate resin of Takahashi having a silicone compound with an amino group and thus the ratio of claim 1 is not disclosed.
In response, Takahashi teach the silicone-based flame retardant with an amino reactive group in addition to the Si-H group and the alkoxy group encompasses the amino modified silicone and is taught in a composition in which the onium salt (sulfonic acid phosphonium salt) is present at 0.01 to 20 parts by weight per 100 parts by weight of the total of the aromatic polycarbonate resin and the onium salt. With respect to claim 1 because the aromatic polycarbonate resin of Takahashi’s composition the onium salt (sulfonic acid phosphonium salt) is present at 0.01 to 20 parts by weight per 100 parts by weight of the total of the aromatic polycarbonate resin which already has the amino based silicone compounds (see page 19, 3rd paragraph from the bottom explaining the formula 9 where the silicone compound used as the silicone-based flame retardant may contain an amino group reactive group in addition to the Si-H group and the alkoxy group) and the onium salt.
Applicants also urge that Takahashi do not teach the nonionic surfactant amendment of claim 1. Upon careful consideration, the teachings of Takahashi et al. are maintained below because Takahashi et al. teach their antistatic component also comprises polyoxyethylene nonionic surfactants as required by claim 1. See page 6, lower 2/3rd of the page headed by (B component antistatic agent) and page 3, 1st paragraph teaches 0.01 to 20 parts by weight of an antistatic agent (component B), guiding one of ordinary skill to the claimed nonionic surfactant.
Thus, it is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill is guided to the same compound comprising the same amino modified silicone smoothing agent, phosphonium salt and ethoxylated nonionic surfactant as claimed. Accordingly, the amended claims are addressed 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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (JP4817685B2) Google Patents translation attached.
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi et al. teaches a smoothing agent with their silicone -based flame retardant having an amino reactive group in addition to the Si-H group and the alkoxy group. See page 19, 4th paragraph from the bottom under the heading (In formula 9) copied herein:
PNG
media_image1.png
126
486
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Takahashi et al. reads upon the claim 1 limitation to at least one onium salt selected from the organic sulfonic acid phosphonium salts by teaching their aromatic polycarbonate resin composition uses a sulfonic acid phosphonium salt as an antistatic agent (component B). See page 15, 7 paragraphs from the bottom, with the heading (iii) Blueing agent.
Takahashi et al. teach nonionic emulsifiers on page 12, 4 sentences from the bottom of the page. Furthermore, Takahashi et al. teach their antistatic component also comprises polyoxyethylene nonionic surfactants as required by claim 1. See page 6, lower 2/3rd of the page headed by (B component antistatic agent) copied herein:
PNG
media_image2.png
182
490
media_image2.png
Greyscale
And page 3, 1st paragraph teaches 0.01 to 20 parts by weight of an antistatic agent (component B), guiding one of ordinary skill to the claimed nonionic surfactant.
Claim 1 limitation to wherein the content ratio of the onium salt is 0.01 to 20 parts by mass is met by Takahashi et al. page 4, 3rd paragraph. Takahashi. discloses a composition in which the onium salt (sulfonic acid phosphonium salt) is present at 0.01 to 20 parts by weight per 100 parts by weight of the total of the aromatic polycarbonate resin which already has the amino based silicone compounds (see page 19, 3rd paragraph from the bottom explaining the formula 9 where the silicone compound used as the silicone-based flame retardant may contain an amino group reactive group in addition to the Si-H group and the alkoxy group) and the onium salt.
Claim 1 limitation wherein the nonionic surfactant includes a compound to which ethylene oxide is added at a ratio of 1 to 20 moles with respect to 1 mole of an aliphatic saturated alcohol with 4 to 20 carbon atoms is read upon by Takahashi et al. teaching a non ionic component B (see page 10, 3rd paragraph) in their antistatic component includes polyoxyethylene nonionic surfactants. The poly (alkylene oxide) glycol component in the polyester block copolymer is a poly (ethylene oxide) glycol component and a poly (tetramethylene oxide) glycol component are used in combination. See page 11,paragraph 2. Also, Takahashi teach an aliphatic saturated alcohol having 4-14 carbons selected from the same alcohols used as a raw material of the nonionic surfactant in Applicant’s specification [0037], see page 15, 5 paragraphs from the bottom teaching the aromatic polycarbonate resin composition further contains a release agents including a fatty acid ester of an aliphatic alcohol and an aliphatic carboxylic acid, the carbon number of the alcohol is in the range of 5 to 30, specifically teaching dodecanol, tetradecanol, hexadecanol, octadecanol. (Pg.5, 5 paragraphs from the bottom). And Takahashi teach the straight - chain C10-C20) alkyl carboxylic acids used as a raw material of the nonionic surfactant in Applicant’s specification [0038], see page 15, (4 paragraphs from the bottom).
Accordingly, it is the Examiner’s position that the Takahashi et al. composition reads upon the claimed carbon fiber precursor treatment agent of claim 1.
Limitation of claim 3 wherein the onium salt includes at least organic sulfonic acid phosphonium salts in which all substituents bonded to the phosphorus atom in the molecule are alkyl groups with not less than 3 carbon atoms is met by the art teaching their general formula 3 of their sulfonic acid phosphonum antistatic agent having 3 carbons. See page 9, middle of the page. Also see 2nd to last paragraph on page 9.
Limitation to claim 4 wherein the smoothing agent includes an amino-modified silicone and a polyether-modified silicone is met by Takahashi et al. teaching on the 2nd ½ of the page 15, that a release agent is added to their aromatic polycarbonate resin composition for the purpose of improving productivity which may be modified with a functional group-containing compound such as acid modification), silicone compound, fluorine compound ( And fluorine oil represented by polyfluoroalkyl ether and the like.
Claim 7 limitation to a carbon fiber precursor to which the carbon fiber precursor treatment agent according to claim 1 is adhered is met by Takahashi et al. teaching their aromatic polycarbonate resin composition comprising carbon fibers adheres (see page 2, 2nd paragraph under Description of the attached Google Patents Translation). See page 16, last paragraph (Viii).
Takahashi et al. do not teach a “carbon fiber treatment agent precursor” finishing agent. Examiner notes the preamble of claim 1 does not limit the structure of the claimed composition. The claim preamble must be read in the context of the entire claim. The determination of whether preamble recitations are structural limitations or mere statements of purpose or use “can be resolved only on review of the entirety of the [record] to gain an understanding of what the inventors actually invented and intended to encompass by the claim.” Corning Glass Works, 868 F.2d at 1257, 9 USPQ2d at 1966. If the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP 2111.02
Here the limitation “carbon fiber treatment agent precursor” is an intended use of the final composition.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrive at the claimed carbon fiber precursor treatment agent comprising the claimed smoothing agent, onium salt and nonionic surfactant because Takahashi et al. teach every claimed structural limitation of a composition comprising an amino modified silicone smoothing agent, a sulfonic acid phosphonium salt and polyoxyethylene nonionic surfactant in general.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PREETI KUMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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.
/GREGORY R DELCOTTO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/PREETI KUMAR/Examiner, Art Unit 1761