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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/6/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment dated 1/6/2025 has been considered and entered into the record. Claim 1, from which all other claims depend, now requires a phosphorus flame retardant agent in an amount of 20–30 weight percent based on a total weight of a core layer. This amendment overcomes the previous prior art rejections based on Kim et al. Accordingly, the previous prior art rejections are withdrawn. Additionally, the amendment of claim 13 overcomes the previous indefinite rejection. This rejection is also withdrawn. Claims 1–5 and 7–14 remain pending and are examined below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 1/6/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1–5 and 7–14 under 35 USC 112 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection are made below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1–5, 7, 8, and 10–14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2019/0105877 A1) in view of Solenicki (US 2019/0291393 A1) and Sato (US 2015/0322262 A1).
Kim teaches a sandwich panel for use in various consumer products or industrial material. Kim abstract. The sandwich panel comprises a core layer formed from a needle-punched polyester fiber nonwoven fabric and a thermoplastic resin core, skin layers stacked on at least one surface of the core layer, and an adhesive layer that bonds the core layer and the skin layer(s). Id. ¶¶ 31–32, 45, 65, Fig. 1. The thermoplastic resin may be polyethylene or polypropylene and may further comprise flame retardants. Id. ¶¶ 61, 80. The skin layer may be formed from a metal selected from the group consisting of aluminum, iron, SUS, and EGI. Id. ¶ 103. The adhesive may be an olefin-based adhesive, a urethane-based adhesive, an acrylic-based adhesive, an epoxy-based adhesive, or combinations thereof. Id. ¶ 28. The nonwoven fabric may be formed by carding the mixed fibers. Id. ¶ 87.
Kim fails to teach that the core comprises a flame-retardant fiber.
Solenicki teaches the formation of a fire-retardant sandwich panel that serves as a protective cover, wherein the panel comprises a thermoplastic core layer and fire-retardant laminates on opposing sides of the core bonded together using adhesive. Solenicki abstract, ¶¶ 36–37, Fig. 1. The fire-retardant laminates comprise a thermoplastic matrix and fibers, wherein the fibers comprise polyester fibers, glass fibers, or combinations thereof, such that glass fibers are preferred. Id. ¶¶ 11–12, 45. The fibers may represent 50–80 weight percent of the laminate. Id. ¶ 10–12.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have either replaced the polyester fibers or added glass fibers to the polyester fibers in Kim at the levels taught in Solenicki to provide fire retardance to the sandwich panel.
Kim and Solenicki fail to teach a phosphate ester flame retardant agent.
Sato teaches the formation of a flame and heat retardant composition for use in making battery and module cases for hybrid and electric vehicles. Sato abstract, ¶¶ 8, 95. The composition may comprise polymer, 5 to 25 weight percent flame retardant, such as organophosphate ester, phosphazene or combinations thereof, and reinforcing filler. Id. ¶ 5, 95.
The ordinarily skilled artisan would have found it obvious to have looked to Sato for guidance in selecting a suitable flame retardant for use in reinforced polymeric composites and its suitable loading level.
Although Kim et al. do not explicitly teach the claimed feature of a thickness expansion ratio of 150% or more after being held in an oven at 200oC for 5 minutes, it is reasonable to presume that said property is inherent to the combination of prior art. Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials (i.e. needled glass fiber core with polyethylene polymer, adhesive layers, and skin layers of claimed composition). The burden is upon Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed property of a thickness expansion ratio of 150% or more after being held in an oven at 200oC for 5 minutes would obviously have been present one the prior art product is provided. Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though rejection is based on Section 103 instead of Section 102. In re Skoner, 517 F.2d 947 (CCPA 1975).
Claim 13 is rejected as it would have been obvious to have sprayed and coated the phosphate ester flame retardant on the surface of the core layer motivated to provide the core with additional flame retardance.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, Solenicki, and Sato as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pilpel (US 2014/0360344 A1).
Kim, Solenicki, and Sato fail to teach a particular type of glass fibers for use in the sandwich panel.
Pilpel teaches the formation of a thermoplastic sandwich composite laminate for use as a battery case, wherein the laminate may comprise glass fibers. Pilpel abstract, ¶¶ 25, 28. The glass fibers may be E-glass or S-glass fibers. Id. ¶ 38. The E-glass fibers are low alkali borosilicate glass with good electrical, mechanical, and chemical resistance properties, while S-glass fibers provide additional strength relative to E-glass, but at a higher cost. Id. ¶¶ 34–38.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan to have used either E-glass or S-glass fibers in the sandwich laminate of Kim to provide improved physical properties.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D MATZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-5732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571.272.7783. 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.
/MATTHEW D MATZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786