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 .
Response to Amendments and Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 21 October 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant successfully argues that Ma does not adequately teach the specific solid or liquid materials recited are used for dispersing the nano-encapsulated phase-change materials. Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection of claim 12 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's amendments and arguments filed 21 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that new limitations more clearly define the structural and performance features that characterize the claimed product. However, many of the examples recited are drawn to the process of making the nano-encapsulated phase-change material and not the actual product. It remains unclear how there process steps materially change the final product claimed. As Ma teaches core-shell particles with a 230 nm size and further teaches the specific materials recited in the dependent claims it is unclear exactly how the process changes the final product structurally.
Additionally, applicant discusses that the polymeric shell has high encapsulation efficiency, resistance to rupture under impact, and long-term thermal cycling stability. However, high encapsulation efficiency is not justification for a composition as it appears that the composition is the same a nanoscale capsule with a cross-linked polymeric shell. Additionally, the resistance to rupture under impact and long-term thermal cycling stability while properties of the product are not presented clearly in the specification in a way that would support that they would necessarily be present in all compositions covered by the instant claims, or that they would not be present in the art of Ma. Additionally, these properties are broad property statements and not disclosed as clear limitations in the claims.
Applicant further states that Ma does not teach that the nano-encapsulated PCM can be in a PU0based or textile compatible matrix. However, these limitations are not found in claim 11 but in claim 12 where the rejection has been withdrawn. Claim 11 is a broad claim to drawn to a matrix comprising any solid or liquid. The reaction solvent broadly reads on this claim limitation.
Accordingly, the rejections of Claims 1-9 and 11 in view of Ma have been maintained.
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 1-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ma et al. (CN103804558, English translation provided for citations, hereinafter referred to as “Ma”).
As to Claim 1: Ma teaches a nanocapsule phase change material emulsion [0002] wherein the phase change material is in the core and there is a shell encapsulating the phase change material [0002-0004]. Ma further teaches that the particle size of the core-shell particles is 230 nm [0056]. The ratio limitation is drawn to the process of making the material and not the material itself. The ratio limitation is considered to be product by process claim limitation and is considered for the final product and not the process of attaining them. As the material of claim 1 is met by the prior art it is considered to read on the ratio as well.
As to Claim 2: Ma teaches the material of claim 1 (supra). Ma further teaches that the cross-linker can be allyl methacrylate [0023].
As to Claims 3 and 4: Ma teaches the material of claim 1 (supra), Ma further teaches that the material can include a chain transfer agent such as dodecyl mercaptan [0022].
As to Claim 5: Ma teaches the material of claim 1 (supra). Ma further teaches that the phase change material can be a C16-27 alkane [0024].
As to Claim 6: Ma teaches the material of claim 1 (supra). Ma further teaches that the phase change material can be hexadecane [0050].
As to Claim 7: Ma teaches the material of claim 1 (supra). Ma further teaches that the monomer can be styrene [0050].
As to Claim 8: Ma teaches the material of claim 1 (supra). Ma further teaches that the initiator can be potassium persulfate [0054].
As to Claim 9: Ma teaches the material of claim 1 (supra). The instant claims are drawn to specific surfactants used in the process of making the material and not the material itself. As the surfactant, or emulsifier, is there to add stability but does not appear to chemically interact in the polymerization product the washing of the material as discussed in [0045] would indicate a material of claim 1 being met without the necessary presence of the stabilizer/emulsifier. Accordingly, the instant claim limitations are considered to be product by process claims and are considered for the final product and not the process of attaining them. As the material of claim 1 is met it is considered to read on the instant claim.
As to Claim 11: Ma teaches the material of claim 1 (supra). Ma further teaches the emulsion can be dispersed without gelation or stratification thereby forming a stable matrix in liquid [0046-0047, Table 1].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J OYER whose telephone number is (571)270-0347. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at (571)272-1197. 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.
/Andrew J. Oyer/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767