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 .
REJECTIONS WITHDRAWN
All previous rejections have been withdrawn.
REJECTIONS REPEATED
There are no rejections repeated.
NEW REJECTIONS
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, 3-11, 13-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Martin et al. (US 2018/0072861).
Martin discloses a pipe comprising a first layer (16) (can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of thermoplastic resin containing a metal oxide, zirconium oxide, which enables dielectric heating of the layer, and a second layer (14, 18, or 20) of a further resin, and a further intermediate layer (18 and/or 20) (either or both can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of a third resin (paragraphs [0001], [0020-0024], [0037-0038], [0042-0054] and Figs. 1-3).
Instant claim 1 defines limitations conversion temperatures Tuk1; and Tuk2, and absorption factors Ak1, Ak2, Az, As1, and As2 with only Az and Ak1, being limited in that Az is greater than Ak1. However, said limitations are necessarily present in Martin since Martin discloses the same structure and materials as applicant (see above) and something which is old does not become patentable upon the discovery of a new property (MPEP 2112).
Martin does not specifically disclose wherein the electrical conductivity of the pipe in a longitudinal direction of the pipe in less than 10-8 S/m. However, the conductivity is inherent in Martin since Martin discloses a pipe comprising a first layer (16) (can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of thermoplastic resin containing a metal oxide, zirconium oxide, which enables dielectric heating of the layer, and a second layer (14, 18, or 20) of a further resin, and a further intermediate layer (18 and/or 20) (either or both can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of a third resin (paragraphs [0001], [0020-0024], [0037-0038], [0042-0054] and Figs. 1-3) which are same structure and materials as claimed by applicant. Something which is old does not become patentable upon the discovery of a new property (MPEP 2112).
The properties recited in claims 3-4, 7-10 and 16 are necessarily present in Martin since Martin discloses a pipe comprising a first layer (16) (can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of thermoplastic resin containing a metal oxide, zirconium oxide, which enables dielectric heating of the layer, and a second layer (14, 18, or 20) of a further resin, and a further intermediate layer (18 and/or 20) (either or both can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of a third resin (paragraphs [0001], [0020-0024], [0037-0038], [0042-0054] and Figs. 1-3) which are same structure and materials as claimed by applicant. Something which is old does not become patentable upon the discovery of a new property (MPEP 2112).
Martin discloses wherein the plastic K1 of the first layer (8}-comprises a polymer, which is selected from one of the polymer classes “aromatic polyamide (PA), aliphatic PA, partially aromatic PA, polyester (PES), polyetherketone (PEK), ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH), fluoropolymer (FP), polyvinylidene chloride (PVDC), polyphenylene sulfide (PPS), polyurethane (PU), thermoplastic elastomer (TPE), polyolefin (PO)”, wherein the plastic K2 of the second layer (2) comprises a polymer selected from another of the mentioned polymer classes, wherein the pipe has a further layer or further layers made out of plastic, wherein the further layer or the further layers has or have aggregate Z (or Y), wherein the first layer with a semiconducting or non- conducting solid comprise(s) more than 50% of the weight of the pipe, wherein aggregate Z and/or aggregate Y is crystalline, and preferably a metal oxide (paragraphs [0001], [0020-0024], [0037-0038], [0042-0054] and Figs. 1-3).
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) 1, 3-14 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin et al. (US 2018/0072861).
Martin discloses a pipe comprising a first layer (16) (can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of thermoplastic resin containing a metal oxide, zirconium oxide, which enables dielectric heating of the layer, and a second layer (14, 18, or 20) of a further resin, and a further intermediate layer (18 and/or 20) (either or both can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of a third resin (paragraphs [0001], [0020-0024], [0037-0038], [0042-0054] and Figs. 1-3).
Instant claim 1 defines limitations conversion temperatures Tuk1; and Tuk2, and absorption factors Ak1, Ak2, Az, As1, and As2 with only Az and Ak1, being limited in that Az is greater than Ak1. However, said limitations are necessarily present in Martin since Martin discloses the same structure and materials as applicant (see above) and something which is old does not become patentable upon the discovery of a new property (MPEP 2112). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided said limitation in order to provide improved heating of the pipe.
Martin does not specifically disclose wherein the electrical conductivity of the pipe in a longitudinal direction of the pipe in less than 10-8 S/m. However, the conductivity is inherent in Martin since Martin discloses a pipe comprising a first layer (16) (can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of thermoplastic resin containing a metal oxide, zirconium oxide, which enables dielectric heating of the layer, and a second layer (14, 18, or 20) of a further resin, and a further intermediate layer (18 and/or 20) (either or both can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of a third resin (paragraphs [0001], [0020-0024], [0037-0038], [0042-0054] and Figs. 1-3) which are same structure and materials as claimed by applicant. Something which is old does not become patentable upon the discovery of a new property (MPEP 2112). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided said conductivity in order to provide improved heating of the pipe
The properties recited in claims 3-4, 7-10 and 16 are all inherent in Martin since Martin discloses a pipe comprising a first layer (16) (can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of thermoplastic resin containing a metal oxide, zirconium oxide, which enables dielectric heating of the layer, and a second layer (14, 18, or 20) of a further resin, and a further intermediate layer (18 and/or 20) (either or both can be polyamide 6, paragraph [0054]) of a third resin (paragraphs [0001], [0020-0024], [0037-0038], [0042-0054] and Figs. 1-3) which are same structure and materials as claimed by applicant. Something which is old does not become patentable upon the discovery of a new property (MPEP 2112). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided said limitation in order to provide improved heating of the pipe.
Martin discloses wherein the plastic K1 of the first layer (8}-comprises a polymer, which is selected from one of the polymer classes “aromatic polyamide (PA), aliphatic PA, partially aromatic PA, polyester (PES), polyetherketone (PEK), ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH), fluoropolymer (FP), polyvinylidene chloride (PVDC), polyphenylene sulfide (PPS), polyurethane (PU), thermoplastic elastomer (TPE), polyolefin (PO)”, wherein the plastic K2 of the second layer (2) comprises a polymer selected from another of the mentioned polymer classes, wherein the pipe has a further layer or further layers made out of plastic, wherein the further layer or the further layers has or have aggregate Z (or Y), wherein the first layer with a semiconducting or non- conducting solid comprise(s) more than 50% of the weight of the pipe, wherein aggregate Z and/or aggregate Y is crystalline, and preferably a metal oxide (paragraphs [0001], [0020-0024], [0037-0038], [0042-0054] and Figs. 1-3).
Martin does not specifically disclose wherein aggregate Z and/or aggregate Y is in powder form, wherein the average particle diameter of aggregate Z and/or of aggregate Y measures at most 100 microns or wherein the first layer or the layers with a semiconducting or non-conducting solid comprises more than 90% of the weight of the pipe. However, discovering the optimum range or value for a result effective variable is obvious and well within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided wherein aggregate Z and/or aggregate Y is in powder form, wherein the average particle diameter of aggregate Z and/or of aggregate Y measures at most 100 microns or wherein the first layer or the layers with a semiconducting or non-conducting solid comprises more than 90% of the weight of the pipe in order to provide improved heating.
Claim(s) 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin et al. (US 2018/0072861) in view of JP2011-169467 (English machine translation provided herein).
Martin does not disclose a fluid fuel line comprising a pipe wherein the fluid line has a respective line connector at ends of the pipe, wherein at least one of the line connectors can be reversibly connected with a counterpart and wherein the pipe has at least two bending points.
JP2011-169467 discloses a fluid fuel line comprising a multi-layered pipe wherein the fluid line has a respective line connector at ends of the pipe, wherein at least one of the line connectors can be reversibly connected with a counterpart and wherein the pipe has at least two bending points (abstract, paragraphs [0035-0044] and Figs. 1-18) in order to provide a resin tube that can be easily connected to a mating pipe without requiring caulking of a metal fitting for connection to the mating pipe at the time of assembly to a vehicle body and that is less likely to be broken even when a bending force is applied.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have provided a fluid fuel line comprising a pipe wherein the fluid line has a respective line connector at ends of the pipe, wherein at least one of the line connectors can be reversibly connected with a counterpart and wherein the pipe has at least two bending points in Martin in order to provide a resin tube that can be easily connected to a mating pipe without requiring caulking of a metal fitting for connection to the mating pipe at the time of assembly to a vehicle body and that is less likely to be broken even when a bending force is applied as taught or suggested by JP2011-169467.
ANSWERS TO APPLICANT’S ARGUMENTS
Applicant’s arguments of 10/9/25 have been carefully considered but are deemed unpersuasive.
Applicant argues, “Unlike the present application, Martin does not disclose or teach the specific features of amended claim 1, which the electrical conductivity of the pipe in the longitudinal direction of the pipe is less than 10⁻⁸ S/m. The Federal Circuit stated that ‘that which may be inherent is not necessarily known and that which is unknown cannot be obvious’. Honeywell Int'l Inc. V. Mexichem Amanco Holding S.A. DE C.V. 865 F.3d 1348, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Further, the Federal Circuit explained in Honeywell: [w]hat is important regarding properties that may be inherent, but unknown, is whether they are unexpected. All properties of a composition are inherent in that composition, but unexpected properties may cause what may appear to be an obvious composition to be nonobvious. Id.
Accordingly, the amended feature of the present application is unexpected
properties of the layer formed in the pipe, which is unknown in Martin. The features of the electrical conductivity of the pipe in the longitudinal direction of the pipe being less than 10⁻⁸ S/m, are not inherently known by Martin because the properties are unknown or unexpected properties of the pipe. (Emphasis added).”
However, conductivity is a known property. Furthermore, something which is old does not become patentable upon the discovery of a new property (MPEP 2112). Claims 1 is also rejected under 102 wherein nonobviousness is irrelevant. Under 103 applicant’s allegations of an unexpected result are not commensurate in scope with the claims since claim 1 does not recite layers 2 – polyamide 6, 3 – EVOH and 4 – polyamide 6 wherein layers 3 and 4 comprise zirconium oxide (see instant specification, paragraphs [0075] – [0079]).
In response to applicant's argument that Martin is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Martin is in the same field of endeavor which is pipes and tubing.
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 MICHAEL C MIGGINS whose telephone number is (571)272-1494. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 1-9 pm 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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/MICHAEL C MIGGINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782
MCM
March 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights