DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 20 January 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9 and 16 as amended are pending.
All outstanding objections and rejections made in the previous Office Action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites a polymer matrix of a first polymer selected from a group including polyphenylene ether; however, parent claim 1 recites that the polymer matrix is substantially free of PPE; it is unclear whether claim 3 allows more PPE than would be “substantially free” of such material.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-3, 9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 98/21272 A1 (“Holl B”) in view of US 5,464,928 (“Chang”) and US 2010/0010141 (“Nakamura”).
As to claims 1-3, 9, and 16, Holl B teaches a composite material of a powdered inorganic material in a polymer matrix (abstract). Holl teaches the particles are ceramic materials that may include silica and alumina and fused quartz (silica) (17:10-15) as required by claims 1 and 2, and therefore the recited fillers are an obvious modification suggested by Holl B. Holl B teaches a particle size of the ceramic particles in the range of 0.1 to 50 micrometers (24:30-25:1), which is within the recited range.
Holl B teaches that the amount of ceramic particles preferably ranges from 70 to 97 volume percent (23:5-20), which substantially overlaps the recited range of 50 to 90 % or 50 to 70 % as required by claim2, such that the polymer is present in amounts between 3 and 40 vol % (para. 0040).
Holl B teaches that the invention uses mills to provide deagglomeration of mixing of the inorganic (ceramic) particles and polymer (13:13-20), thus suggesting a composition substantially free of agglomerates. Holl B teaches dewatering the mixture of inorganic particles and polymer, the resulting paste is formed in a mold under heat and pressure to cause polymer to flow into the interstices between the particles to achieve maximum density (15:14-35) form a composite of individual nonagglomerated particles each surrounded by polymer (See Fig. 2). Thus, while Holl B does not state a relative density of 90% or greater, the fact that Holl B teaches filling the interstices completely with the polymer to achieve maximum density suggests a relative density (i.e., comparison with theoretical density of the polymer and ceramic particles) of greater than 90 %.
Holl B is not particularly limiting as to the use of polymer, but teaches thermosetting or thermoplastic, and in particular teaches polyimides, especially thermoplastic polyimides (26:12-36), which suggests non-crosslinked polymer as required by claim 3. Holl B does not discuss semicrystalline polyimide as required by claims 1 and 3. However, Chung teaches the utility of semicrystalline polyimide for providing better flow at temperatures near melting, which assists in workability (1:40-2:10), which is specifically relevant to the invention of Holl, which requires melting and flowing polymer resin into the interstices between inorganic particles. As such, the use of semicrystalline polyimide as a thermoplastic polyimide is an obvious modification for its flowability as taught by Chung. Holl B teaches thermoplastic polyimide, and does not teach or suggest the use of semicrystalline polyamide or polyphenylene ether as required by claims 1 and 16.
Holl B teaches use of the material for various purposes in electronics, including packaging (7:4-11), but does not discuss a housing component. Nakamura teaches that thermoplastic compositions with inorganic fillers including recited fillers (para. 0071) and polyimide (para. 0020) may be used for various moldings including cell phone housings (para. 0017), and as such, the end use recited by claims 1 and 9 is an obvious use of known molding material taught by Holl B.
Claim(s) 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 98/21272 A1 (“Holl B”) in view of US 5,464,928 (“Chang”) and US 2010/0010141 (“Nakamura”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of US 2005/0167136 (“Centofante”).
As to claim 4, Holl B as modified by Chang and Nakamura teaches housing components, but does not discuss an overmolded component covering a portion. However, it is known from Centofante that housings for electronic devices may be formed in two parts in which an electronic device is positioned on a housing base and overmolded with a second part of the housing (abstract), where the overmolding and base may both be thermoplastic material (Centofante, para. 0032). Note that the “second polymer” is construed as inclusive of being the same polymeric material as the first polymer matrix. As such, it would be an obvious modification to prepare a housing component of the plastic material, including in a base and overmolded structure, as Centofante teaches the same is a suitable method of preparing an electronics housing.
As to claim 5, Holl B as modified by Chang and Nakamura does not teach the recited structure. Centofante teaches that the base member as protrusions (see Figs. 5 and 6) that will fit into the overmolded portion, and as such, a base member with protrusions and recesses is an obvious modification for preparing an electronic device housing.
As to claims 6 and 7, Holl B as modified by Chang and Nakamura does not teach circuit components disposed between. However, it is known from Centofante that housings for electronic devices may be formed in two parts in which an electronic device is positioned on a housing base and overmolded with a second part of the housing (abstract), where the overmolding and base may both be thermoplastic material (Centofante, para. 0032). Centofante teaches the sandwiched device may be a printed circuit board as required by claims 6 and 7 (para. 0025). As such, it would be an obvious modification to prepare a housing component of the plastic material, including in a base and overmolded structure, as Centofante teaches the same is a suitable method of preparing an electronics housing.
As to claim 8, Holl B as modified by Chang and Nakamura does not teach the overmolded resins. However, as discussed with respect to claim 4, Centofante teaches forming a housing component by overmolding over a base. Centofante teaches the overmolding material may be of the same type of plastic as the base (para. 0032). As such, it would be an obvious modification to prepare a housing component of the plastic material, including in a base and overmolded structure of the recited plastic material, as Centofante teaches the same is a suitable method of preparing an electronics housing.
Double Patenting
Claims 1-2, 9, and 16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 19 of copending Application No. 17/754,169 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because copending claim 19 recites a housing, thus housing part, for a portable electronic device, the part made from ceramic particles in a polymer matrix having the recited amount of ceramic particles and polymer matrix, the recited ceramic particle materials, recited polymer matrix materials, the recited Dv50 of the ceramic particles, the particles free from agglomeration, relative density as claimed by claim 1. Copending claim 19 recites an amount of ceramic particles encompassing the range of claim. Copending claim 19 also recites the housing parts required by claim 9. While copending claim 19 does not recite the exclusion of SC polyamide and polyphenylene ether recited by claims 1 and 16, copending claim 19 recites that the composition may include one of the polymers (for example, PAEK), such that the lack of the others would be an obvious modification suggested by the language of the claim.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9 and 16 over the previously cited art have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is maintained as now modified.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KREGG T BROOKS whose telephone number is (313)446-4888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9 am to 5:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Arrie Reuther can be reached at (571)270-7026. 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.
/KREGG T BROOKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764