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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/10/2025 has been entered.
The previous prior art rejection under Kawabe et al (WO 2016181641) and Treat et al et al (WO
2018144141) in view of Kawabe maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
3. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabe et al (WO
2016181641), cited in previous Office Action.
4. Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Treat et al (WO 2018144141, cited herein with identical US 20200231794) in view of Kawabe, cited in previous Office Action.
Amendments to claims 8 and 13 are noted.
Kawabe teaches a thermoplastic resin (A), which preferably accounted for 25-75% of the composition, can be formed solely from an elastomer and the preferred composition contains 0.1 to 50 parts by mass of the compatibilizing agent (B), which can be represented by polypropylene-based resin and 30-70 parts of a filler.
Treat teaches the composition comprises 50-93 wt. % of the thermoplastic polymer, and 7-50 wt. % of the mineral additive (i.e., talc), relative to a total weight of the composition (see 0047).
Regarding claimed limitation recited that an elastomer, a thermoplastic resin and a filler constitute 100% of the composition, Kawabe teaches such a composition in Example 1.
The rejection can be found in the NON-FINAL office action mailed 2/25/2025 and is
herein incorporated by reference.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant submits that even though Kawabe teaches filler amount within the range of 30-70% wt., the reference discloses 35.7% by mass of filler in Example 31.
However, a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. Merck & Co. V. Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also >Upsher-Smith Labs. V. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (reference disclosing optional inclusion of a particular component teaches compositions that both do and do not contain that component) (see MPEP 2123).
Applicant argues that Kawabe fails to teach the claimed composition, specifically used for 3D printing.
Examiner disagrees. Kawabe teaches a composition, which can be used in a wide variety of applications, including 3D printing. The latter use is positively disclosed in Kawabe's Specification.
Note that Rejection under 35 USC 112(2) is withdrawn in view of claims 8 and 13 amendments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY LISTVOYB whose telephone number is (571)272-6105. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm 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, Heidi Riviere Kelley can be reached at (571) 270-1831. 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.
GL
/GREGORY LISTVOYB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
Prosecution Insights