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 .
Disposition of Claims
Claims 1-6, 9, 11, 13-16 and 19-31 are pending in the application. Claims 7-8, 10, 12 and 17-18 have been cancelled.
Amendments to claims 16, 21 and 26, filed on 12/3/2025, have been entered in the above-identified application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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 following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9, 11, 13-16 and 19-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsui et al. (US 6,174,602 B1) in view of Vedula (US 2010/0325782 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 14-16, 25-26 and 28-31, Matsui teaches, in a preferable embodiment of a fiber (II), a fiber (IIa) comprising (A2) a fiber component comprising a crystalline aliphatic polyester having a melting point of not less than 140° C. and a heat of fusion of not less than 20 J/g and (B2) a fiber component comprising a block copolymer and/or mixture of at least two aliphatic polyesters, the difference in melting point between them being at least 10° C., wherein the block copolymer and/or mixture contains 95 to 10% by weight of a high-melting component (H) having a melting point of not less than 110° C. and a heat of fusion of at least 3 J/g and 5 to 90% by weight of a low-melting component (S) having a melting point of 40 to 120° C. and a heat of fusion of at least 3 J/g (col. 14, lines 16-28). The polymer (A2) is required to have a heat of fusion of at least 20 J/g, and the heat of fusion is preferably at least 30 J/g, more preferably at least 40 J/g (col. 14, lines 60-62; also col. 13, lines 37-40).
FIGS. 4A to 4D are cross sectional views of a fiber showing some examples of the self-adhesive conjugated fiber (Ila) (col. 23, lines 9-13). In the figures, 10 is a polymer (A2) for retaining strength, and 11 is an adhesive component (B2) (col. 23, lines 9-13).
The examiner notes that the aliphatic polyester encompasses block or random copolymers of or mixtures of aliphatic polyesters and at most 50% by weight of other components such as an aromatic polyester, a polyether, a polycarbonate, a polyamide, a polyurea, a polyurethane and a polyorganosiloxane (col. 5, lines 24-49). With respect to (A2), examples of components used in the copolymerization or mixing with the homopolymers include polyurethanes (col. 14 lines 6-15). The aliphatic polyester (B2) is a block copolymer or a mixture of the main constituent components (H) and (S) (col. 15, lines 50-51). It is also possible to react a difunctional compound, e.g., a diisocyanate such as hexanediisocyanate, a dicarboxylic acid anhydride such as phthalic anhydride and a dicarboxylic acid halide such as terephthaloyl chloride, with a mixture of two or more kinds of aliphatic polyesters having terminal hydroxyl group to produce a block copolymer (col. 15, lines 55-61). The aliphatic polyester (B2) is mainly composed of the aliphatic polyester components (H) and (S), but may contain, as a secondary component (at most 50% by weight, especially at most 30% by weight), other components such as aromatic component, polyether component, polycarbonate component, polyurethane component, polyamide component, polyorganosiloxane component and so on (col. 16, lines 21-27).
The conjugated fiber (Ila) can be formed into an arbitrary form such as continuous multifilament, continuous mono-filament or staple, and after optionally blending it with other fibers by various means, it is used in the form of yarn, knitted fabric, woven fabric, non-woven fabric, felt, a composite body with paper or film, or in the form of other analogous fiber structures (col. 22, lines 27-33).
Matsui does not explicitly disclose a reaction product of a first diisocyanate with the first polyol intermediate, or providing an equivalent ratio of isocyanate groups to hydroxyl groups of about 0.95 to about 1.10.
However, Vedula teaches preferred elastic fibers that are made from thermoplastic polyurethane polymers and are made by a unique melt spinning process where the fiber is wound into bobbins at a speed just slightly higher than the melt velocity of the polymer exiting the spinneret (Abstract). An exemplary fiber is made by melt spinning a thermoplastic polyurethane polymer, preferably a polyester polyurethane polymer ([0012]). The equivalent ratio of the diisocyanate to the total equivalents of the hydroxyl terminated intermediate and a diol chain extender is generally from about 0.95 to about 1.10, desirably from about 0.97 to about 1.03, and preferably from about 0.97 to about 1.00 ([0033]-[0034]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the polyurethanes in the compositions of Matsui with an equivalent ratio of a diisocyanate to total equivalents of a hydroxyl terminated intermediate and a chain extender of from about 0.95 to about 1.10 because these are conventional polymerization methods well known in the art and literature, as suggested by Vedula ([0032]-[0034]).
Claim 1 includes product-by-process limitations. The product being claimed appears to be the same as or obvious over the prior art product, in which case differences in process are not considered to impart patentability. In addition, Matsui teaches melt--spinning (col. 2, lines 28-26). Thus, the burden is shifted to Applicant to show that any differences in process would result in an unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art product.
Regarding claims 2-3, 5 and 23-24, Matsui teaches that the shrinkage percentage in boiling water of a fiber made of the polymer (A2) alone which is a low-shrinkable component is preferably at most 20%, especially at most 15%, more especially at most 10%, most especially at most 8% (col. 18, lines 48-51; and col. 44, lines 53-62). The shrinkage percentage in boiling water of a fiber made of the polymer (B2) alone is preferably at least 20%, especially from 30 to 60% (col. 19, lines 27-29; and col. 44, lines 53-62).
Matsui teaches a shrinkage percentage in boiling water after 10 minutes instead of after 90 seconds of exposure at 70 °C as claimed. However, given that Matsui in view of Vedula teaches the same polyurethane components in the same ratios claimed, as well as melting enthalpies overlapping with the claimed ranges, the composition of Matsui in view of Vedula would have the claimed properties as the same compound necessarily has the same properties. In addition, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to expect that the claimed properties would be so provided, as the properties cannot be separated from the materials, and as the shrinkage percentage ranges taught by Matsui would also reasonably encompass the claimed ranges.
Regarding claims 4 and 21-22, Matsui teaches that the conjugation ratio (sectional area ratio) of the fiber component (A2) and the fiber component (B2) in the self-crimpable conjugated fiber (Ila) is not particularly limited (col. 23, lines 3-7). Preferably the conjugated ratio is from 10/1 to 1/10, especially 5/1 to 1/5, more especially 2/1 to 1/2 (col. 23, lines 3-7). The examiner notes that the disclosed conjugation ratio is a sectional area ratio instead of a weight ratio. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have expected that the densities of the disclosed thermoplastic polymers would be similar enough that the disclosed conjugated (area) ratios of from 10/1 to 1/10 would correspond to weight ratios overlapping with the claimed ranges.
Regarding claim 6, Matsui teaches that fiber (IIa) comprises (A2) a fiber component comprising a crystalline aliphatic polyester having a melting point of not less than 140° C. and a heat of fusion of not less than 20 J/g and (B2) a fiber component comprising a block copolymer and/or mixture of at least two aliphatic polyesters, the difference in melting point between them being at least 10° C., wherein the block copolymer and/or mixture contains 95 to 10% by weight of a high-melting component (H) having a melting point of not less than 110° C. and a heat of fusion of at least 3 J/g and 5 to 90% by weight of a low-melting component (S) having a melting point of 40 to 120° C. and a heat of fusion of at least 3 J/g (col. 14, lines 16-28). FIGS. 4A to 4D are cross sectional views of a fiber showing some examples of the self-adhesive conjugated fiber (Ila) (col. 23, lines 9-13). In the figures, 10 is a polymer (A2) for retaining strength, and 11 is an adhesive component (B2) (col. 23, lines 9-13). The examiner notes that, due to fiber component (B2), fiber (IIa) would have a melting range overlapping with the claimed melting range of 100 °C to 120 °C.
Regarding claims 9, 11 and 19-20, Matsui teaches that the aliphatic polyester is those containing, as a main component, namely in an amount of at least 50% by weight (preferably at least 60% by weight, more preferably at least 70% by weight), components derived from the raw materials of the aliphatic polyester, e.g., 4) a polyalkylene glycol such as an oligomer of a polyalkylene ether such as diethyelene glycol, triethylene glycol, ethylene/propylene glycol or dihydroxyethylbutane, polyethylene glycol, polypropylene glycol or polybutylene glycol, (5) a polyalkylene carbonate glycol such as polypropylene carbonate, polybutylene carbonate, polyhexane carbonate, polyoctane carbonate or polydecane carbonate, and oligomers thereof, and (6) an aliphatic dicarboxylic acid such as succinic acid, adipic acid, suberic acid, azelaic acid, sebacic acid or decanedicarboxylic acid (col 5., lines 24-49). Vedula teaches that suitable dicarboxylic acids which may be used alone or in mixtures generally have a total of from 4 to 15 carbon atoms and include: succinic, glutaric, adipic, pimelic, suberic, azelaic, sebacic, dodecanedioic, isophthalic, terephthalic, cyclohexane dicarboxylic, and the like ([0018]). The glycols include (among others) 1,3-butanediol and 1,4-butanediol ([0018]). Vedula also teaches aromatic polyisocyanates ([0028]).
Regarding claims 13 and 27, Matsui does not explicitly disclose wherein both the core thermoplastic polyurethane and the sheath thermoplastic polyurethane are free of crosslinking. However, Matsui teaches that, in order to improve the heat shrinkability and the elasticity restoration property after shrinking, it is preferable to impart a branched structure or a crosslinked structure to the polymers which constitute the component (B) (col. 21, lines 14-18). In an embodiment, Matsui further teaches that the core polymer and/or the sheath polymer may contain a small amount (within a range capable of performing melt-polymerization and melt-spinning) of a branched structure or a crosslinked structure (col. 40, lines 46-50). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have imparted either a branched structure or a cross-linked structure to the core and/or sheath of the fiber in order to adjust the heat shrinkability and the elasticity restoration property of the fiber after shrinking.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 9, 11, 13-16 and 19-31 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Worrell whose telephone number is (571)270-7728. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached on 571-270-7692. 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.
/Kevin Worrell/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789