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 .
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi (JP 2018135421 A, hereinafter referring to the attached ESPACENET translation) in view of Kokusan (Kokusan Seiko Screw Decanter Catalogue), Records (Decanter Centrifuge Handbook Ch, 6), and Fukui (WO 2019235557, hereinafter referring to US 2021/0054541 A1 as the English language equivalent).
Regarding claim 1, Yamaguchi teaches a method for producing cellulose nanofibers on a commercial basis, which has excellent operational efficiency and little variation in quality ([0006]), and exemplifies the inventive method wherein a pulp slurry of TEMPO oxidized cellulose fibers is processed through a centrifugal dehydrator at 600 G until a pulp cake of 15% or more with respect to solid mass was produced ([0047]). This process reads on the claimed “solid-liquid separation,” and the cellulose fibers of Yamaguchi read on the claimed “denatured cellulose fibers” because the instant Specification particularly states that TEMPO oxidation produces anionically-denatured cellulose fibers (see instant Specification at [0014]). Finally, while the centrifugal force of 600 G taught by Yamaguchi falls outside of the claimed range of “50 G or more and 550 G or less,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close, because prima facie one having ordinary skill in the art would have expected them to have the same properties (see MPEP 2144.05.I.).
Yamaguchi is silent with regard to the claimed limitation requiring that the centrifuge is a continuous centrifuge. However, Yamaguchi teaches that preferred centrifuges include those produced by Kousan Seiko (Yamaguchi, [0042]). Kokusan Seiko produces continuous decanter centrifuges (see Kokusan P.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a continuous decanter centrifuge in the process taught by Yamaguchi as Kokusan products are expressly identified as suitable for use in this capacity.
Yamaguchi as modified further differs from claim 1 because it is silent with regard to the claimed feed rates.
In the same field of endeavor, Records teaches the impact of process variables on the performance of a decanter centrifuge (p. 243), and provides data which indicates how feed rates of decanter centrifuges impact process performance (p.255, section 6.4.1). Records particularly states that, as the feed rate of a decanter centrifuge increases, the recovery rate of solids from the input feed (p. 255, section 6.4.1). Records therefore recognizes that the feed rate is a result-effective variable in tuning the recovery of particles from a liquid medium via decanter centrifuge. It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform routine optimization on the feed rate of the centrifugation process taught by Yamaguchi to achieve a desired recovery amount within the process. One having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so because Yamaguchi exemplifies the use of a flow rate of 100 L/min ([0047]) which is in excess of the claimed range.
Yamaguchi teaches the heat treatment of the cellulose fibers ([0038]), but further differs from claim 1 because it is silent with regard to the incorporation of “previously shortened denatured cellulose fibers.”
In the same field of endeavor, Fukui teaches a method for producing shortened anionically modified cellulose fibers and a method for producing modified cellulose fibers using the shortened anionically modified cellulose fibers obtained by said method ([0001]), and teaches that shortened fibers are useful for lowering the viscosity of cellulose fiber dispersions ([0004]) which, in turn, improves the applicability for formulations (e.g., paints), in which said fibers are utilized ([0003]). Fukui teaches that the inventive shortening method comprises a thermal decomposition under temperatures ranging from 50 to 230 °C ([0166], claim 1). The shortened fibers produced therefrom read on the claimed “previously shortened denatured cellulose fibers” because the instant Specification states that the claimed shortened fibers are produced by thermal decomposition under the same temperature conditions ([0006] and [0015]). Fukui further teaches that the cellulose fibers which are shortened in this manner may be TEMPO-modified cellulose fibers ([0025]), which aligns with the fibers taught by Yamaguchi, as described above. Furthermore, Fukui particularly states that the product of the shortening treatment is a low-viscosity dispersion of cellulose fibers ([0044]), and therefore the product of this method would remain suitable for the processes contemplated by Yamaguchi, which are focused on cellulose dispersions (e.g., [0007]). Finally, Fukui contemplates the centrifugation of dispersions of the shortened fibers ([0156]).
It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to shorten the fibers of Yamaguchi using the method taught by Fukui, prior to the centrifugation step taught by Yamaguchi, for the purpose of reducing the viscosity of the final dispersion of cellulose fibers, to improve the applicability of the dispersion in formulations such as paints. Fukui also teaches that the fibers produced from the shortening process range from 1 µm or more and 500 µm or less ([0037]), which encompasses the claimed range of “50 µm or more and 500 µm or less,” establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 3, Yamaguchi teaches that the pulp slurry becomes concentrated to 15 wt% ([0047]), which falls within the claimed range of “5% by mass or more,” establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 4, as described above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a continuous decanter centrifuge in the process taught by Yamaguchi.
Regarding claim 6, as described above, Yamaguchi teaches the TEMPO oxidation of the cellulose fibers ([0047]), which reads on the claimed “anionic denaturation” because the instant Specification states that TEMPO oxidation is a suitable form of anionic denaturation (c.f. instant Specification at [0014]).
Regarding claim 9, Yamaguchi teaches that, in the exemplified process, water is being removed from the fibers ([0047]), and therefore the dispersion comprises water.
Regarding claim 10, as described above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to shorten the fibers of Yamaguchi, prior to the centrifugation step taught by Yamaguchi, using the method taught by Fukui for the purpose of reducing the viscosity of the final dispersion of cellulose fibers. Doing so would improve the applicability of the dispersion in formulations such as paints as taught by Fukui. In doing so, the fibers undergo a thermal decomposition treatment of anionically denatured cellulose fibers under the temperature conditions of 50°C or higher and 230°C or lower (c.f. Fukui, Abstract and [0166] claim 1), which reads on the claimed “thermal decomposition treatment” step. Furthermore, the temperature range taught by Fukui ([0166], claim 1) is identical to the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
As described above, Yamaguchi teaches and exemplifies a method for producing cellulose nanofibers on a commercial basis, which has excellent operational efficiency and little variation in quality ([0006]), wherein a pulp slurry of TEMPO oxidized cellulose fibers is processed through a centrifugal dehydrator at 600 G until a pulp cake of 15% or more with respect to solid mass was produced ([0047]). This process reads on the claimed “solid-liquid separation,” and the cellulose fibers of Yamaguchi read on the claimed “denatured cellulose fibers” because the instant Specification particularly states that TEMPO oxidation produces anionically-denatured cellulose fibers (see instant Specification at [0014]). Finally, the centrifugal force of 600 G taught by Yamaguchi falls within the claimed range of “50 G or more and 600 G or less,” establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 11, as described above, Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui teaches a cake of denatured cellulose fibers. Furthermore, Fukui teaches the introduction of a modifying group of EO/PO to an ethanol dispersion of cellulose fibers which had been previously dispersed and centrifuged multiple times to substitute ethanol for water ([0156]-[0157], Example 12). Fukui teaches that the EO/PO groups are linked to the cellulose fibers ([0157]), which reads on the claimed “modified cellulose.” The method of Fukui also reads on the claimed step of “introducing a modifying group” because Fukui has taught the incorporation of said EO/PO group and mixing under 24 hours ([0157]), which reads on “introducing.” Fukui further teaches that the modified, shortened, and anionically-denatured fibers are particularly useful for photo-curable compositions when produced according to the inventive procedure ([0053]). It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cellulose fiber cake produced by Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui, using the modification method taught by Fukui, to produce EO/PO-modified cellulose fibers for the purpose of increasing the fibers’ suitability in photocurable compositions.
Regarding claim 12, as described above, Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui teaches a cake of denatured cellulose fibers. Fukui further teaches a fine pulverizing treatment of the cellulose fibers ([0041]), and exemplifies the pulverization of cellulose fibers which have been re-formed into a dispersion ([0155]). Fukui further teaches that the finely pulverized fibers are useful because they possess both low viscosity and excellent handling properties ([0041]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to re-disperse the fiber cake of Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui and subsequently expose said fibers to a fine pulverizing treatment as taught by Fukui for the purpose of forming a fiber dispersion with both low viscosity and excellent handling properties. Fukui further teaches that the fibers produced from the fine pulverization treatment have an average length of 50 nm or more and 300 nm or less (p. 18, claim 9), which is identical to the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 13, as described above, Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui teaches a cake of denatured cellulose fibers and further obviates the production of shortened, modified, and fine cellulose fibers. Fukui further teaches the mixing of the cellulose fibers with resin to produce a resin composition ([0092]-[0095]). Fukui further teaches that these compositions are suitable for producing highly precise 3-dimensional cured products ([0011]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to mix the products of Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui into a resin composition as taught by Fukui for the purpose of developing a photocurable resin which may produce highly precise 3-dimensional cured products.
Regarding claim 14, Fukui further teaches that the cellulose fibers within the resin composition may contain the EO/PO modification compound as discussed in the rejection of claim 9, above (p. 12, <29> to <30>).
Regarding claims 15 and 18, Fukui teaches the incorporation of between 0.01 wt% and 20 wt% of cellulose fibers within the resin composition ([0106]), which encompasses the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claims 16 and 19, Fukui teaches that the resin may be formed, inter alia, epoxy and urethane methacrylic resins ([099]), both of which read on the claimed list. Fukui further teaches the incorporation of commercially available products such as epoxy and acrylic resins ([0101]).
Regarding claims 17 and 20, Fukui teaches that the resin composition may be prepared by optionally adding a solvent ([0110]).
Claims 1, 3, 5, and 9-20 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi (JP 2018135421 A, hereinafter referring to the attached ESPACENET translation) in view of Ohlendieck (Ch. 12 Centrifugation and Ultracentrifugation), Kokusan (Kokusan Seiko Screw Decanter Catalogue), Records (Decanter Centrifuge Handbook Ch, 6), and Fukui (WO 2019235557, hereinafter referring to US 2021/0054541 A1 as the English language equivalent).
Regarding claim 1, Yamaguchi teaches a method for producing cellulose nanofibers on a commercial basis, which has excellent operational efficiency and little variation in quality ([0006]), and exemplifies the inventive method wherein a pulp slurry of TEMPO oxidized cellulose fibers is processed through a centrifugal dehydrator at 600 G until a pulp cake of 15% or more with respect to solid mass was produced ([0047]). This process reads on the claimed “solid-liquid separation,” and the cellulose fibers of Yamaguchi read on the claimed “denatured cellulose fibers” because the instant Specification particularly states that TEMPO oxidation produces anionically-denatured cellulose fibers (see instant Specification at [0014]).
Yamaguchi differs from claim 2 because it is silent with regard to the claimed centrifugal force of 50 G or more and 550 G or less.
In the same field of endeavor, Ohlendieck teaches fundamentals of centrifugation and teaches that centrifugal force allows for the separation of particles in a liquid medium (p. 424, 12.1 Introduction section). Ohlendieck further teaches the basic principles of sedimentation, and teaches that the sedimentation rate of particles relates to the applied centrifugal field (p. 429, first full paragraph). Ohlendieck therefore recognizes that the centrifugal field (G) is a result-effective variable in tuning the sedimentation rate of particles in a liquid medium. It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform routine optimization on the G force applied in the centrifugation process taught by Yamaguchi to achieve a desired sedimentation rate within the process. One having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so because Yamaguchi exemplifies the use of 600 G, which is in excess of the claimed range, and because Kokusan Seiko continuous centrifuges are all indicated as being capable of centrifugal forces well in excess of the claimed range (e.g., Seiko pp. 6-7).
Yamaguchi is silent with regard to the claimed limitation requiring that the centrifuge is a continuous centrifuge. However, Yamaguchi teaches that preferred centrifuges include those produced by Kousan Seiko (Yamaguchi, [0042]). Kokusan Seiko produces continuous decanter centrifuges (see Kokusan P.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a continuous decanter centrifuge in the process taught by Yamaguchi as Kokusan products are expressly identified as suitable for use in this capacity.
Yamaguchi as modified further differs from claim 1 because it is silent with regard to the claimed feed rates.
In the same field of endeavor, Records teaches the impact of process variables on the performance of a decanter centrifuge (p. 243), and provides data which indicates how feed rates of decanter centrifuges impact process performance (p.255, section 6.4.1). Records particularly states that, as the feed rate of a decanter centrifuge increases, the recovery rate of solids from the input feed (p. 255, section 6.4.1). Records therefore recognizes that the feed rate is a result-effective variable in tuning the recovery of particles from a liquid medium via decanter centrifuge. It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform routine optimization on the feed rate of the the centrifugation process taught by Yamaguchi to achieve a desired recovery amount within the process. One having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so because Yamaguchi exemplifies the use of a flow rate of 100 L/min ([0047]) which is in excess of the claimed range.
Yamaguchi teaches the heat treatment of the cellulose fibers ([0038]), but further differs from claim 1 because it is silent with regard to the incorporation of “previously shortened denatured cellulose fibers.”
In the same field of endeavor, Fukui teaches a method for producing shortened anionically modified cellulose fibers and a method for producing modified cellulose fibers using the shortened anionically modified cellulose fibers obtained by said method ([0001]), and teaches that shortened fibers are useful for lowering the viscosity of cellulose fiber dispersions ([0004]) which, in turn, improves the applicability for formulations (e.g., paints), in which said fibers are utilized ([0003]). Fukui teaches that the inventive shortening method comprises a thermal decomposition under temperatures ranging from 50 to 230 °C ([0166], claim 1). The shortened fibers produced therefrom read on the claimed “previously shortened denatured cellulose fibers” because the instant Specification states that the claimed shortened fibers are produced by thermal decomposition under the same temperature conditions ([0006] and [0015]). Fukui further teaches that the cellulose fibers which are shortened in this manner may be TEMPO-modified cellulose fibers ([0025]), which aligns with the fibers taught by Yamaguchi, as described above. Furthermore, Fukui particularly states that the product of the shortening treatment is a low-viscosity dispersion of cellulose fibers ([0044]), and therefore the product of this method would remain suitable for the processes contemplated by Yamaguchi, which are focused on cellulose dispersions (e.g., [0007]). Finally, Fukui contemplates the centrifugation of dispersions of the shortened fibers ([0156]).
It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to shorten the fibers of Yamaguchi using the method taught by Fukui, prior to the centrifugation step taught by Yamaguchi, for the purpose of reducing the viscosity of the final dispersion of cellulose fibers, to improve the applicability of the dispersion in formulations such as paints. Fukui also teaches that the fibers produced from the shortening process range from 1 µm or more and 500 µm or less ([0037]), which encompasses the claimed range of “50 µm or more and 500 µm or less,” establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 3, Yamaguchi teaches that the pulp slurry becomes concentrated to 15 wt% ([0047]), which falls within the claimed range of “5% by mass or more,” establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 4, as described above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a continuous decanter centrifuge in the process taught by Yamaguchi.
Regarding claim 6, as described above, Yamaguchi teaches the TEMPO oxidation of the cellulose fibers ([0047]), which reads on the claimed “anionic denaturation” because the instant Specification states that TEMPO oxidation is a suitable form of anionic denaturation (c.f. instant Specification at [0014]).
Regarding claim 9, Yamaguchi teaches that, in the exemplified process, water is being removed from the fibers ([0047]), and therefore the dispersion comprises water.
Regarding claim 10, as described above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to shorten the fibers of Yamaguchi, prior to the centrifugation step taught by Yamaguchi, using the method taught by Fukui for the purpose of reducing the viscosity of the final dispersion of cellulose fibers. Doing so would improve the applicability of the dispersion in formulations such as paints as taught by Fukui. In doing so, the fibers undergo a thermal decomposition treatment of anionically denatured cellulose fibers under the temperature conditions of 50°C or higher and 230°C or lower (c.f. Fukui, Abstract and [0166] claim 1), which reads on the claimed “thermal decomposition treatment” step. Furthermore, the temperature range taught by Fukui ([0166], claim 1) is identical to the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
As described above, Yamaguchi teaches and exemplifies a method for producing cellulose nanofibers on a commercial basis, which has excellent operational efficiency and little variation in quality ([0006]), wherein a pulp slurry of TEMPO oxidized cellulose fibers is processed through a centrifugal dehydrator at 600 G until a pulp cake of 15% or more with respect to solid mass was produced ([0047]). This process reads on the claimed “solid-liquid separation,” and the cellulose fibers of Yamaguchi read on the claimed “denatured cellulose fibers” because the instant Specification particularly states that TEMPO oxidation produces anionically-denatured cellulose fibers (see instant Specification at [0014]). Finally, the centrifugal force of 600 G taught by Yamaguchi falls within the claimed range of “50 G or more and 600 G or less,” establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 11, as described above, Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui teaches a cake of denatured cellulose fibers. Furthermore, Fukui teaches the introduction of a modifying group of EO/PO to an ethanol dispersion of cellulose fibers which had been previously dispersed and centrifuged multiple times to substitute ethanol for water ([0156]-[0157], Example 12). Fukui teaches that the EO/PO groups are linked to the cellulose fibers ([0157]), which reads on the claimed “modified cellulose.” The method of Fukui also reads on the claimed step of “introducing a modifying group” because Fukui has taught the incorporation of said EO/PO group and mixing under 24 hours ([0157]), which reads on “introducing.” Fukui further teaches that the modified, shortened, and anionically-denatured fibers are particularly useful for photo-curable compositions when produced according to the inventive procedure ([0053]). It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cellulose fiber cake produced by Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui, using the modification method taught by Fukui, to produce EO/PO-modified cellulose fibers for the purpose of increasing the fibers’ suitability in photocurable compositions.
Regarding claim 12, as described above, Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui teaches a cake of denatured cellulose fibers. Fukui further teaches a fine pulverizing treatment of the cellulose fibers ([0041]), and exemplifies the pulverization of cellulose fibers which have been re-formed into a dispersion ([0155]). Fukui further teaches that the finely pulverized fibers are useful because they possess both low viscosity and excellent handling properties ([0041]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to re-disperse the fiber cake of Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui and subsequently expose said fibers to a fine pulverizing treatment as taught by Fukui for the purpose of forming a fiber dispersion with both low viscosity and excellent handling properties. Fukui further teaches that the fibers produced from the fine pulverization treatment have an average length of 50 nm or more and 300 nm or less (p. 18, claim 9), which is identical to the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 13, as described above, Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui teaches a cake of denatured cellulose fibers and further obviates the production of shortened, modified, and fine cellulose fibers. Fukui further teaches the mixing of the cellulose fibers with resin to produce a resin composition ([0092]-[0095]). Fukui further teaches that these compositions are suitable for producing highly precise 3-dimensional cured products ([0011]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to mix the products of Yamaguchi as modified by Fukui into a resin composition as taught by Fukui for the purpose of developing a photocurable resin which may produce highly precise 3-dimensional cured products.
Regarding claim 14, Fukui further teaches that the cellulose fibers within the resin composition may contain the EO/PO modification compound as discussed in the rejection of claim 9, above (p. 12, <29> to <30>).
Regarding claims 15 and 18, Fukui teaches the incorporation of between 0.01 wt% and 20 wt% of cellulose fibers within the resin composition ([0106]), which encompasses the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claims 16 and 19, Fukui teaches that the resin may be formed, inter alia, epoxy and urethane methacrylic resins ([099]), both of which read on the claimed list. Fukui further teaches the incorporation of commercially available products such as epoxy and acrylic resins ([0101]).
Regarding claims 17 and 20, Fukui teaches that the resin composition may be prepared by optionally adding a solvent ([0110]).
Response to Arguments
As an initial matter, the Applicant has requested confirmation that the drawing of the instant disclosure is acceptable and that no further action is necessary thereon. The drawing provided is acceptable.
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks filed December 3, 2025, with respect to 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claims 7 and 8 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's remaining arguments filed December 3, 2025, regarding 35 USC 103, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that Yamaguchi fails to disclose or suggest the use of a decanter centrifuge. However, while Yamaguchi does not directly state the use of a decanter centrifuge, Yamaguchi specifies the preferred usage of Kousan Seiko centrifuges ([0042]), and Kousan Seiko produces continuous decanter centrifuges. It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a continuous decanter centrifuge produced by Kousan Seiko, despite Yamaguchi not explicitly stating the use of decanter-type centrifuges. Applicant argues that Example 1 of Yamaguchi is directed towards a batch process. However, patents are relevant as prior art for all of the information that they contain, and non-preferred
and alternative embodiments nonetheless constitute prior art (see MPEP 2123.I and II). The incorporation of an example which does not utilize a continuous centrifuge therefore does not rebut the use of a continuous centrifuge, which would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as described above.
Applicant next argues that the force applied within Kousan Seiko centrifuges (as evidenced within the Kousan Seiko catalogue) indicates operating at between 2,000 and 3,500 xG, and therefore one having ordinary skill in the art would operate said centrifuges within this range. However, the Kousan Seiko catalogue specifically states that forces within this range are the maxiumum suitable forces. One having ordinary skill in the art would therefore understand that forces up to and including that range are suitable – not merely that the maximum force must be used every time. To the contrary, as described above, Yamaguchi teaches an example method which utilizes 600xG. The claimed range is therefore not far-separated from the range taught by the prior art. Alternatively, as described above, Ohlendieck recognizes centrifugation speed as a result-effective variable, which one having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize to reach a desired sedimentation rate.
Applicant next argues that the prior art references fail to teach or suggest that an average fiber length of the “previously shortened” fibers is within the range of 50 to 500 microns. However, as described above, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to shorten the fibers of Yamaguchi using the method taught by Fukui, prior to the centrifugation step taught by Yamaguchi, for the purpose of reducing the viscosity of the final dispersion of cellulose fibers, to improve the applicability of the dispersion in formulations such as paints. Fukui teaches that the fibers produced from the shortening process range from 1 µm or more and 500 µm or less ([0037]), which encompasses the claimed range of “50 µm or more and 500 µm or less,” establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JOSHUA CALEB BLEDSOE whose telephone number is (703)756-5376. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. EST.
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, Robert Jones can be reached at 571-270-7733. 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.
/JOSHUA CALEB BLEDSOE/Examiner, Art Unit 1762
/ROBERT S JONES JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1762