DETAILED ACTION
This communication responds to the application and claim set filed July 14, 2022, and the Response to Restriction Requirement filed December 30, 2025. Claims 1-26 are currently pending. Claims 1-3 and 7-15 are under examination.
Non-elected claims 4-6 and 16-26 are WITHDRAWN.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, and 13-15 are REJECTED for the reasons set forth below.
Claims 10-12 are OBJECTED TO as depending from a rejected claim, but otherwise contain allowable subject matter.
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 and Species I, claims 1-3 and 7-15, in the reply filed on December 30, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1-3 and 7-15 are under examination.
Priority
This application is a continuation of PCT/JP2021/001317, filed January 15, 2021, which claims priority to JP 2020-004383, filed January 15, 2020. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (WO 2018/026017) in view of Kagiya et al. (US 3,838,030).
The examiner will refer to the US version of Yoshida (US 10,538,605).
Regarding claims 1-3, Yoshida teaches a method of producing low molecular weight PTFE comprising the following steps:
PNG
media_image1.png
257
407
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(col. 2, lines 16-29.) Yoshida further teaches that the resulting low molecular weight PTFE may then be heated at temperatures preferably between 100 and 130°C. (col. 6, lines 12-22.) Heating the PTFE deactivates any remaining radical chain ends. (See Published Specification at para. [0118].)
The difference between Yoshida and the present claims is that the additives in the irradiation step (including chlorinated hydrocarbons) do not include those recited in claim 1. However, using these additives during irradiation of PTFE is known in the art. For example, Kagiya teaches a process for irradiating PTFE in the presence of oxygen and either halogenated methanes such as chloromethane or H2. (col. 1, lines 48-58; Example 3.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the additives of Kagiya (O2 and H2) in place of the additives of Yoshida (particularly the chlorinated hydrocarbons) with the reasonable expectation of forming a useful low molecular weight PTFE because Kagiya identifies both H2 and chloromethane as useful additives in the irradiation process. (See MPEP 2143(I)(B).)
Regarding claim 7, Yoshida teaches that the additive is present in the preferred amount of 0.001 to 10 mass%, relative to the amount of PTFE. (col. 3, lines 42-46.)
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Yoshida teaches that the radiation in the irradiation process has a preferred dose of 100 to 750 kGy. (col. 4, line 66 – col. 5, line 2.)
Regarding claim 13, Yoshida teaches that the resulting PTFE has a specific gravity of preferably 2.130 to 2.230. (col. 2, lines 32-33.)
Regarding claim 14, Yoshida teaches that both the irradiated PTFE and resulting low molecular weight PTFE are preferably in the form of a powder. (col. 2, lines 34-36.)
Regarding claim 15, Yoshida teaches that the resulting low molecular weight PTFE is heated up to a temperature lower than the primary melting point to provide a molded article with a specific gravity of 1.0 g/cm3 or higher. (col. 5, lines 12-29.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 10-12 contain allowable subject matter over the closest prior art, Yoshida in view of Kagiya. While Yoshida teaches that the irradiation process preferably contains substantially no oxygen (see col. 2, lines 30-31), the process of Kagiya (irradiating PTFE in the presence of O2 and either halogenated methane or H2) requires that O2 be present. Accordingly, when considering the teachings of both Yoshida and Kagiya, a person of ordinary skill would not reasonably conclude that adding just H2 as the additive in the process of Yoshida would result in a desirable low molecular weight PTFE. Thus, Yoshida in view of Kagiya does not teach or fairly suggest an irradiation process conducted in an substantially oxygen-free state.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE S BRANCH whose telephone number is (571)270-3539. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through 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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 571-272-1130. 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.
CATHERINE S. BRANCH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1763
/CATHERINE S BRANCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763