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 1-2, 5, 7-8 and 11-18 are pending in the application. Claims 3-4, 6 and 9-10 have been cancelled. Claims 15-18 are withdrawn from consideration due to Applicant’s elections.
Amendments to claims 1 and 7, filed on 12/29/2025, 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 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 7-8 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richards et al. (US 2017/0036428 A1) in view of Hughes (US 2017/0283647 A1).
Regrading claims 1-2, Richards teaches a multilayered pultruded structure having a weatherable cap layer over a pultruded substrate, adhered with an appropriate tie layer (Abstract). The pultruded substrate is a fiber-reinforced thermoset resin, produced by pulling a blend of fibers and the liquid resin through a die-as known in the art ([0021]). Particularly preferred thermoset resins are polyesters and polyurethane ([0023]). A cap layer or layers (one or more thermoplastic cap layers; and a thin, outermost chemical resistant layer, as claimed) is applied to tie layer on the pultruded substrate ([0050]). The cap layer(s) have a thickness of between 0.0025 and 1 mm, preferably between 0.005 and 0.5 mm ([0051]). Useful cap layer polymers include, but are not limited to styrenic-based polymers, acrylic-based polymers, polyesters, polycarbonate and thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) ([0052]). In one embodiment, the acrylic-based layer is a blend of an acrylic polymer and 5 to 80 wt %, preferably 10 to 40 wt %, of a polyvinylidene fluoride polymer or copolymer thereof ([0055]).
Most preferably the acrylic polymer is a copolymer having 70 to 99.5 weight percent of methyl methacrylate units and from 0.5 to 30 weight percent of one or more C1-8 straight or branched alkyl acrylate units ([0052]). In one embodiment, the cap layer polymer has a weight average molecular weight of between 50,000 and 500,000 g/mol, and preferably from 75,000 and 150,000 g/mol, as measured by gel permeation chromatography (GPC) ([0054]).
As applied above, Richards teaches a cap layer or layers. The examiner notes that the innermost of these layers would meet the claimed limitation “one or more cap layers”, and the outermost layer would meet the claimed limitation “a thin, outermost chemical resistant layer”.
In the alternative, 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 claimed chemical resistant property would be so provided, as the reference teaches the same materials as the claimed structure, and as the properties cannot be separated from the materials.
Richards further teaches that the acrylic-based layer comprises either an acrylic polymer, or a vinyl cyanide-containing compound, for example an acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) copolymer, an acrylonitrile-styrene-acrylate (ASA) copolymer, or styrene acrylonitrile (SAN) copolymer ([0052]). “Acrylic polymer” as used is meant to include polymers, copolymers and terpolymers formed from alkyl methacrylate and alkyl acrylate monomers, and mixtures thereof ([0052]).
Richards does not explicitly disclose wherein the (meth)acrylic resin comprises a high Tg of greater than 100° C.
However, Hughes teaches compositions and articles comprising a stress and crack resistant component comprising a thermoplastic component and an elongation component (Abstract). In one example the stress-resistant component comprises a thermoplastic component comprising (A) one or more polymer selected from the group consisting of polyesters which includes copolyesters, polycarbonates, polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), poly(acrylonitrile-styrene-acrylate) (ASA), poly(acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene) (ABS), poly(styrene-acrylonitrile) (SAN), cellulose esters and mixtures thereof, and (B) a polymeric elongation modifier component ([0019]). In examples, either or both the stress resistant component and the thermoplastic component(s) has a Tg ranging from 60 to 150° C. or 70 to 130° C. or 75 to 115°C ([0100]). The examiner notes that Hughes further teaches Tg ranges including from 100 to about 150° C. or from 110 to about 150° C. or from 120 to about 150° C. or from 130 to about 150° C. or from 140 to about 150° C. ([0099]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have used an acrylic polymer having a Tg ranging from 60 to 150° C., or 70 to 130° C., or 75 to 115°C (e.g., from 140 to about 150°C), in order to provide a stress resistant component in the outer coating layer of an article, as suggested by Hughes (Abstract and [0099]-[0100]; also see [0019] and [0061]).
Regarding claim 5, Richards teaches that, in one embodiment, the cap layer polymer has a weight average molecular weight of between 50,000 and 500,000 g/mol, and preferably from 75,000 and 150,000 g/mol, as measured by gel permeation chromatography (GPC) ([0054]).
Regarding claim 7, Richards teaches that at least one tie layer is selected from the group consisting of 1) an extrudable thermoplastic tie layer that is coextrudable with at least one of the pultruded structure a) or thermoplastic cap layer c), and 2) a radiation curable coating ([0012]).
Regarding claim 8, Richards teaches that useful extrudable tie layers include, but are not limited to, thermoplastics including polyamides, copolyamides, block copolymers of polyamide and polyester; acrylic, styrenic or butadiene-based block copolymers, functionalized olefins, functionalized acrylics, polylactic acid (PLA) and ABS ([0028]).
Regarding claim 11-12, Richards teaches that other typical additives may also be added to one or more of the tie or cap layers, including but not limited to impact modifiers, fillers or fibers, or other additives of the type used in the polymer art ([0058]). Examples of useful additives include, for example, UV light inhibitors or stabilizers, lubricant agents, heat stabilizers, flame retardants, synergists, pigments and other coloring agents ([0058]). The amount of filler and additives included in the polymer compositions of each layer may vary from about 0.01% to about 70% of the combined weight of polymer, additives and filler ([0058]). Generally amounts from about 5% to about 45%, from about 10% to about 40%, are included ([0058]). 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 UV light inhibitors or stabilizers that either absorb and/or reflect light in order to provide the intended functions of UV inhibition or stabilization.
Regarding claims 13-14, Richards teaches that the weatherable, capped, pultruded substrate of the invention is useful as a replacement for wood and metal structures and parts ([0060]). Typical uses include: window profiles (residential and commercial), windows, doors, door profiles, fencing, decking, railings, skylight framings, commercial curtainwall used in skyscrapers ([0060]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends the following: “”…claim 1 as amended is readily distinguishable from Richards which teaches a pultruded structure comprising a fiber-reinforced polyurethane thermoset resin. In the Background section of Richards at paragraphs [0006] to [0009], the mechanical disadvantages associated with polyester-based pultruded structures compared to polyurethane-based pultruded structures are described in addition to the potentially expanded scope of technologies where polyurethane-based pultruded structures would be suitable. Notably, all of the Examples in Richards are directed to pultruded polyurethane substrates.”
Regarding this contention, Richards teaches that particularly preferred thermoset resins are polyesters and polyurethane ([0023]; also [0021]). Richards further teaches that, due to its higher modulus, and cost, polyurethane is an especially preferred resin for use in the invention ([0023]). Although Richards teaches that polyurethane is even more preferable than polyesters, Richards still teaches that polyesters are preferred thermoset resins for use in the pultruded substrate of the invention ([0021] and [0023]). Richards is also not limited to the examples. With respect to the articles claimed by applicant in claim 14, Richards teaches, without limitation, that the weatherable, capped, pultruded substrate of the invention is useful as a replacement for wood and metal structures and parts, and that typical uses include: window profiles (residential and commercial), windows, doors, door profiles, fencing, decking, railings, skylight framings, commercial curtainwall used in skyscrapers ([0060]). Therefore, as applied above, Richards meets the claimed limitations.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
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