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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-17, in the reply filed on 01/05/26 is acknowledged. As such, non-elected claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 7 is not further limiting of independent claim when the zinc is present as a zinc metal or as a zinc compound. Only when the zinc is present as a combination of a zinc metal and a zinc compound is the claim further limiting.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Applicant is advised that should claim 14 be found allowable, claim 17 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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) 1-7 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No.: 2016/0280931 A1.
Liu et al. discloses a zinc-rich epoxy anti-corrosion coating comprising a component A capable of being cured into a film, and a component B containing a curing agent, wherein the component A comprises, by mass percentage, 0.1-5 wt % graphene, 0-35 wt % zinc powder, 30-70 wt % filler, 10-20 wt % epoxy resin having 54 wt % solid content, and 10-20 wt % solvent, wherein the sum of the mass percentage contents of the graphene, zinc powder and filler is 60-80 wt % and the sum of the mass percentage contents of all components of component A is 100 wt %. According to the present invention, the addition of graphene to an anti-corrosion coating decreases the thickness of the coating film, reduces the amount of zinc powder while increases the anti-corrosion effect. It reduces zinc oxide vapour generated during welding and is environmentally friendly, see abstract.
Applicant’s claims are deemed to be anticipated over Liu et al.’s Component A as set forth in Examples 2-3. As way of illustration only, in Example 2, Component A comprises: 1 wt.% by weight graphene, 35 wt.% zinc powder, 34 wt.% barium sulphate, 16 wt.% epoxy resin and 14 wt.% solvent 1. Please note that all said concentration amounts fall directly within Applicant’s dependent claims 11-17, and the epoxy resin component meets the limitation of Applicant’s dependent claim 4.
Applicant’s claims are also deemed to be anticipated over Liu et al. Examples 2-3 when Component A is admixed with Component B at a mass ratio of 10:1, see paragraph [0073] of Examples 2-3. As way of illustration only, in Example 2, when Component A is admixed with Component B at a mass ratio 10:1, the Examiner calculated concentrations of graphene is (1/1.1) = 0.91 wt.% and zinc powder concentration is (35/1.1) = 31.82 wt.%. Please note that all said concentration amounts fall directly within Applicant’s dependent claims 11-17.
Also note that the graphene component, according to Liu et al.’s invention, has a high oxygen content and is preferably produced through oxidation of graphite followed by exfoliation (either chemical or mechanical), see paragraphs [0024]-[0030], thus meeting the limitations of Applicant’s dependent claims 2-3 and 5.
Finally note that the limitations of Applicant’s dependent claim 6 is met when Component A is admixed with Component B, and the resulting mixture undergoes polymerization after it is applied as a coating to a substrate, because such would result in the polymer being grafted to a surface of the graphene material.
Claim(s) 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Liu et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No.: 2016/0280931 A1.
Liu et al. has been described above and Examples 2-3 are deemed to anticipate Applicant’s claims even though the examples do not disclose the actual atomic percent of oxygen in their high oxygen containing graphene component. It is held that Liu et al.’s high oxygen containing graphene components have oxygen concentrations that either directly fall within or extensively overlaps in scope of the oxygen concentration ranges claimed by applicant.
Furthermore and in the alternative, Liu et al.’s invention and Applicant’s claimed invention are both drawn to compositions containing graphene oxide, zinc and a resin binder, wherein said compositions are subsequently used for the same purpose of providing an anti-corrosion paint/coating for a substrate. Thus one having ordinary skill in the art would be well motivated to adjust the oxygen concentration of the graphene component so that the resulting anti-corrosion paint/ coating composition functions properly for its intended purpose. Please note that it is well known in the art that graphene is an excellent electrical conductor which can be a highly problematic property for a material being used in an anti-corrosion paint/coating composition. One having ordinary skill in the art would also know that the addition of atomic oxygen and/or certain functional groups (hydroxyl, amine, carbonyl etc.) has the effect of extensively reducing the electrical conductivity of the graphene, which can be highly advantageous when graphene is used in anti-corrosion paint/ coating compositions.
Claim(s) 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Virtanen U.S. Patent Application Publication No.: 2018/0319996 A1.
Virtanen discloses one or more techniques are disclosed for a method for functionalized a graphitic material comprising the steps of: 1) providing a graphitic material; 2) providing a first molecule comprising a first group, a spacer, and a second group; 3) providing a second molecule comprising a third group, a spacer, and a fourth group, wherein the third group is a different group from the first group; and 4) bonding the first molecule and the second molecule to the graphitic material. Also disclosed is a tunable material composition comprising the functionalized carbon nanotubes or functionalized graphene prepared by the methods described herein, see abstract, and paragraphs [0003] and [0026]-[0030].
The tunable material composition can subsequently be admixed with a thermoplastics matrix material, such as epoxy resin, polyacrylate and polyurethane, see paragraphs [0040]-[0041], [0049], [0078]-[0081] and Example 5. This disclosure meets the limitation of applicant’s dependent claim 4.
The tunable material composition can also subsequently be admixed with sacrificial metal particles, such as zinc particles, to make highly effective anti-corrosive paint/coating compositions, see paragraphs [0006], [0078]-[0081] and Example 5.
The functionalizing groups for the graphitic material (e.g. graphene) are preferably selected from groups such as, thiol, carboxyl, trialkoxysilyl, ether, amino, hydroxyl etc., see paragraph [0040] and [0049]. This disclosure meets the limitation of applicant’s dependent claims 2-3 and 5.
The graphitic material (e.g. graphene) materials are preferably modified by grafting a polymer to an edge or surface of the graphitic material (e.g. graphene) materials, see paragraph [0026], [0061] and Figure 7. This disclosure meets the limitation of applicant’s dependent claim 6.
Applicant’s claims are deemed to be anticipated over Virtanen’s Example 5 wherein multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are first functionalized with aminopropyl trimethoxysilane and then admixed with zinc powder and Epon 828 (i.e. an epoxy resin) matrix material to make an anti-corrosive coating composition. Please note that Virtanen’s said multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNTs) of Example 5 are deemed to read on Applicant’s claimed graphene-based material in light of Applicant’s disclosure of the specification and dependent claim 3, wherein the graphene materials can be made from a few layers.
In the alternative and assuming that Virtanen’s said multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNTs) of Example 5, can be said not to read directly on applicant’s graphene-based material, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to substitute said multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNTs) of Example 5 with functionalized graphene in light of Virtanen’s disclosure of paragraphs [0003] and [0026]-[0030] and [0040]. It is well established in the art that it is not inventive to merely follow the direct disclosure of a prior-art reference.
Virtanen Example 5 is also deemed to anticipate Applicant’s claims 8-10 even though the Example does not disclose the actual atomic percent of oxygen in the aminopropyl trimethoxysilane functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNTs) component. It is held that Virtanen’s aminopropyl trimethoxysilane functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNTs) component has an oxygen concentrations that either directly fall within or extensively overlaps in scope of the oxygen concentration ranges claimed by applicant.
Furthermore and in the alternative, Virtanen’s invention and Applicant’s claimed invention are both drawn to compositions containing functionalized graphene, zinc and a resin binder, wherein said compositions are subsequently used for the same purpose of providing an anti-corrosion paint/coating for a substrate. Thus one having ordinary skill in the art would be well motivated to adjust the oxygen and or nitrogen concentration of the functionalized graphene component so that the resulting anti-corrosion paint/ coating composition functions properly for its intended purpose.
As way of illustration only, Virtanen’s disclosure provides ample motivation to one having ordinary skill in the art to substitute hydroxyl, carboxyl or other oxygen containing groups for the actually used aminopropyl trimethoxysilane functionalized group of Example 5. Please note that it is well known in the art that graphene is an excellent electrical conductor which can be a highly problematic property for a material being used in an anti-corrosion paint/coating composition. One having ordinary skill in the art would also know that the addition of atomic oxygen and/or certain other functional groups (e.g. hydroxyl, amine, carbonyl etc.) has the effect of extensively reducing the electrical conductivity of the graphene, which can be highly advantageous when graphene is used in anti-corrosion paint/ coating compositions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH DAVID ANTHONY whose telephone number is (571)272-1117. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10:00AM-6:30PM.
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 (Lanee) 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.
/JOSEPH D ANTHONY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764