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 § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shima US 6908879.
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Shima teaches a process of making a molded article (Abstract, Example 2). The process includes making a particulate composition including 93 parts alpha alumina, 6 parts methyl cellulose, 1 part silica, and 6 parts corn starch (Example 2). The parts are by weight (Example 2). Once the particulate composition is form it is extruded into a molded object (Example 2). The methyl cellulose and/or corn starch is considered water absorbing polymer particles under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims. The amounts of alpha alumina and water absorbing polymer described in Shima fall within the rages recited in instant claim 1 (Example 2).
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(s) 2-5, and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shima US 6908879 as applied to claims 1, and 6 above, and further in view of JP 2017154967.
Regarding clams 2-5, and 7-10, Shima does not expressly state that the alumina particles have a particle size distribution having one or more first peaks with vertices between 10 and 100 μm and one or more second peaks with vertices between 0.1 and 10 μm. Nor that the alpha alumina particles have a first peak between 1-10 micrometers, and a second peak between 0.1-1 micrometers. Nor that the first peak has an apex between 10 and 30 μm. Nor that 80% by mass or more of single-crystal α-alumina particles having substantially no crushing surface.
The prior art of JP ‘967 is an analogous process of making an alpha alumina molded articles, where JP ‘967 teaches that the alpha alumina has a particle size distribution having one or more first peaks with vertices between 10 and 100 μm and one or more second peaks with vertices between 0.1 and 10 μm (Claims). And that the alpha alumina particles have a first peak between 1-10 micrometers, and a second peak between 0.1-1 micrometers (Claims). And that the first peak has an apex between 10 and 30 μm (Claims). And that 80% by mass or more of single-crystal α-alumina particles having substantially no crushing surface (Claims).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to preform the process of Shima including the alpha alumina described in JP ‘967. The rationale for doing so would have been combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (See MPEP 2143, Exemplary rationale (A)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A FIORITO whose telephone number is (571)272-9921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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.
/JAMES A FIORITO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731