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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 6, 2025 has been entered.
Claims 1-10 are currently pending in the above identified application.
Claims 2-10 have been withdrawn from consideration as being directed towards a non-elected invention.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Product Catalogue by Toray Monofilament Co. Ltd. (“Toray” herewithin) in view EP 3239366 to Murata.
NOTE: The NPL of Product Catalogue by Toray Monofilament Co. Ltd. Submitted by Applicant on November 6, 2025 containing English Translation of p. 29 and 18 is being used for prior art mapping.
As discussed in the Communication pursuant to Rule 114(2) EPC mailed by the European Patent Office on August 26, 2024, the Catalogue is considered prior art as being available prior to the effectively filed date. See report for additional information.
Regarding claim 1, Toray teaches a polyphenylene sulfide (PPS) monofilament having a breaking strength of 4.6 cN/dtex, breaking elongation of about 36%, 5% Modulus of about 1.06 cN/dtex, and 10% Modulus of about 1.6 cN/dtex as derived from the strength elongation curve for PPS and conversion from g/d to cN/dtex (Toray, p. 2). The monofilament would necessarily have a fineness.
Toray is silent with regards to the specific fineness of the monofilament.
However, Murata teaches it is known to form a polyphenylene sulfide filament having a fineness of 6 to 33 dtex when used in filtration in order for pressure loss by filtration to be reduced even if the filter has a higher density (Murata, abstract, para 0024). Murata also teaches the monofilament having a strength of more preferably at least 3.5 cN/dtex for durability (Id., para 0025).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to form the PPS monofilament of Toray, wherein the monofilament has a fineness of 6 to 33 dtex as taught by Murata, motivated by the desire of using conventionally known fineness predictably suitable for PPS monofilament having a strength greater than 3.5 cN/dtex that are durable and by the desire to select a fineness suitable for use in filtration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER ANN GILLETT whose telephone number is (571)270-0556. The examiner can normally be reached 7 AM- 4:30 PM EST M-H.
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.
/JENNIFER A GILLETT/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights