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 .
The effective filing date for the instant claims is 7/28/20.
The lined out IDS item is not in English nor is the written opinion of the instant application’s counterpart.
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-5,7-12,16,17 and 19-21 and polycarbonate as “a” in the reply filed on 12/8/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Kikuchi no longer meets amended claim 1. This is not found persuasive because the rejections below of amended claim 1 justify the restriction.
Claim 16 (directed to PC +ABS) is considered nonelected as only polycarbonate was elected as “a”. Claim 11 is considered within the election as the claim permits zero of the rubber-like polymer.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claims 1-5,7-9,11,12,17,19 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN110157173 in view of Kikuchi 2016/0108234.
CN’173 discloses a composition for laser direct structuring for good metal platability (paragraph 4). The reference exemplifies (#2) a blend of 65 parts polycarbonate, 15 parts PBT, 5 parts LDS additive, 2 parts maleated polyethylene, 1 part MBS, 15 parts flame retardant and 0.5 parts antioxidant. This is:
Parts ingredient %
65 polycarbonate (ie applicant’s “a”) 62.8
15 PBT (ie applicant’s “a”) 14.5
5 LDS 4.8
2 maleated PE (ie applicant’s “d”) 1.9
MBS (ie applicant’s “rubber-like polymer”) 1.0
Flame retardant 14.5
0.5 antioxidant 0.5
The identity of the LDS additive (paragraph 27) is merely said to be “commercially available” instead of applicant’s specific LDS additive.
Applicant’s specific LDS additive is known (see claim 42 of Kikuchi; paragraph 152’s aluminum doped ZnO). This particular LDS additive is said to give excellent platability (paragraph 185 of Kikuchi).
It would have been obvious to utilize Kikuchi’s LDS additive as CN’173’s LDS additive for the expected good platability.
In regards to applicant’s dependent claims:
Aluminum doped ZnO is applicant’s preferred LDS additive (see applicant’s table 1) – meeting applicant’s claim 3.
The composition is rated as V-O – meeting applicant’s claim 7.
The properties of applicant’s claims 9,19 and 20 are not reported. Given the proposed combination results in applicant’s preferred composition, the same properties would be expected to result.
Claims 1,3-5,7-12,17 and 19-21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN110655792 in view of Kikuchi 2016/0108234.
CN’792 discloses a composition for laser direct structuring for good metal platability (paragraph 47). The reference exemplifies (#2) a blend of 75 parts polyphenylene sulfide, 5 parts glass spheres, 5 parts mica, 3 parts melamine, 3 parts aluminum diethylphosphite, 3 parts SEBS, 1 parts maleated low density polyethylene, 0.3 parts PETS, 0.4 parts antioxidants, 15 parts stannous thiocyanate and 15 parts glass fiber.
This is:
Parts ingredient %
75 PPS (ie applicant’s “a”) 59.7
5 glass spheres 4.0
5 mica 4.0
melamine 2.4
3 aluminum diethyl phosphite 2.4
3 SEBS 2.4
maleated LDPE(ie applicant’s ‘d”) 0.8
0.3 PETS 0.2
0.4 antioxidants 0.3
15 stannous thiocyanate 11.9
15 glass fibers 11.9
The stannous thiocyanate is apparently the LDS additive (paragraph 40) instead of applicant’s specific LDS additive. However, the reference suggests alternative LDS additives based on zinc oxides, aluminum oxide etc (paragraph 40).
Applicant’s specific LDS additive is known (see claim 42 of Kikuchi; paragraph 152’s aluminum doped ZnO). This particular LDS additive is said to give excellent platability (paragraph 185 of Kikuchi).
It would have been obvious to utilize Kikuchi’s LDS additive as CN’792’s LDS additive for the expected good platability.
In regards to applicant’s dependent claims:
Aluminum doped ZnO is applicant’s preferred LDS additive (see applicant’s table 1) – meeting applicant’s claim 3.
The UL94 rating is not reported. Given the melamine is a flame retardant (paragraph 35), a rating of at least V2 would be expected – meeting applicant’s claim 7.
The properties of applicant’s claims 9,19 and 20 are not reported. Given the proposed combination results in applicant’s preferred composition, the same properties would be expected to result.
The reference’s mica filler qualifies as applicant’s “c”. The total of “b” + “c” in the cited example is 15.9%. However, the reference (eg claim 1) permits up to 30 parts of the filler and 30 parts of the LDS. This meets the amounts of applicant’s claims 10 and 21.
Claims 1-5,7-12,17 and 19-21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi 2016/0108234 in view of Kanaya 2016/0160044.
Kikuchi exemplifies (#22) a blend of 100 parts polybutylene terephthalate, 6 parts LDS 23K, 50.3 parts glass fiber, 0.3 parts PED522 and 0.3 parts antioxidant. LDS 23K is applicant’s preferred “b” (see applicant’s table 1). This is:
parts ingredient %
100 PBT (ie applicant’s “a”) 63.7
6 LDS (ie applicant’s “b”) 3.8
glass fiber 32.1
0.3 PED522 0.2
0.3 antioxidant 0.2
The PED522 is misidentified as polyethylene oxide based. It is actually a polyethylene wax (see AD8 of table 1-2 of Kikuchi 2023/0374300; Martin 6860241’s table 1; Metz 6485558 col 5 line 48).
The PED522 is not a maleated polyethylene as required by applicant.
Such maleated polyethylenes are known. Kanaya (paragraph 101-103,124-129; 217) teaches that acid modified waxes such as HiWax1105A provides good impact strength, mold releasability etc relative to typical olefin waxes when used in reinforced thermoplastic compositions. HiWax1105A is applicant’s preferred “d” (see applicant’s table 1).
It would have been obvious to substitute HiWax1105A for Kikuchi’s PED522 to improve the composition’s properties.
In regards to applicant’s dependent claims:
The resin may be polycarbonate in lieu of PBT (paragraph 29) – meeting applicant’s claim 2.
The properties of applicant’s claims 7,9,19 and 20 are not reported. Given the proposed combination results in applicant’s preferred composition, the same properties would be expected to result.
The amount of LDS additive may be as high as 40 parts per 100 resin (paragraph 26). Silicate filler (ie applicant’s “c”) may be present in amounts as high as 30 parts per 100 resin (paragraph 105). Non conductive metal oxide (ie applicant’s “c”) may be present in amounts as high as 80 parts per 100 resin (paragraph 77). Therefore, the total of “b” + “c” can meet the amounts of applicant’s claims 10 and 21.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J BUTTNER whose telephone number is (571)272-1084. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-3pm.
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 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.
/DAVID J BUTTNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765 12/30/25