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
Claim 1-5, 8, 12-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teng et al. (US 2009/0249728 A1) in view of ESCSI (NPL) and Pinault et al. (US 7,125,601 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, 4 and 5, Teng teaches a roofing granule that can comprise granules of expanded slate, expanded clay and/or expanded shale, porous mineral based materials. (Paragraph 0010, 0030, 0040). ESCSI teaches expanded slate, expanded slate and expanded clay are inherently heat-treated materials due to their method of making, expansion caused by heat-treatment. (Page 1-6 – 1-7).
Teng does not teach the granules have a moisture absorption of at least 7 wt%.
However, ESCSI teaches expanded slate, expanded clay and/or expanded shale will have a moisture absorption of 5 to 25 wt%. (Page 10-7). This overlaps the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05). ESCSI also teaches having high moisture absorption range, due to this specific porosity, reduces surface moisture by drawing the moisture into the expanded particle (Page 10-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the moisture range of Teng to the claimed moisture range as taught by ESCSI to reduce surface moisture of the particle.
Teng does not specifically teach the granules are coated in ceramic coating with a pigment. Teng does teach it is known that roofing granules can be colored (Paragraph 0010, 0036).
Pinault teaches a roofing material comprising a ceramic coating with a colorant (pigment) applied to the granules. Pinault teaches this colored ceramic coating provides the advantage of adding desired aesthetics to the granule and allows for other beneficial properties to added to the particle, such as anti-microbial properties. (Column 6, Lines 24-45). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to apply the claimed ceramic coating with a pigment to the heat-treated granules of Teng.
Regarding Claim 2-3, Teng teaches the roofing granules comprise granules of expanded slate, expanded clay and/or expanded shale. (Paragraph 0010).
Regarding Claim 8, Teng teaches the granules can have a density of 30 to 70 lb/ft3 or less than 70 lb/ft3 or about 20 to about 70 lb/ft3 (Claim 14 of Teng; Paragraph 0010, 0026, 0030, 0039). This overlaps the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05).
Regarding Claim 12, Teng teaches a shingle comprising substrate, an organic coating (asphalt) and an aggregate of expanded shale, expanded slate or expanded clay, porous and mineral aggregates. (Paragraph 0010-0011, 0018, 0030; Claim 12 of Teng). ESCSI teaches expanded slate, expanded slag and expanded clay are inherently heat-treated materials due to their method of making, expansion caused by the heat-treatment. (Page 1-6 – 1-7).
Teng teaches the heat-treated aggregates are pushed into organic coating of asphalt, partially embedded. (Paragraph 0027).
Teng does not teach the granules have a moisture absorption of at least 7 wt%.
However, ESCSI teaches expanded slate, expanded clay and/or expanded shale will have a moisture absorption of 5 to 25 wt%. (Page 10-7). This overlaps the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05). ESCSI also teaches having high moisture absorption range, due to this specific porosity, reduces surface moisture by drawing the moisture into the expanded particle (Page 10-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the moisture range of Teng to the claimed moisture range as taught by ESCSI to reduce surface moisture of the particle.
Teng does not specifically teach the granules are coated in ceramic coating with a pigment. Teng does teach it is known that roofing granules can be colored (Paragraph 0010, 0036).
Pinault teaches a roofing material comprising a ceramic coating with a colorant (pigment) applied to the granules. Pinault teaches this colored ceramic coating provides the advantage of adding desired aesthetics to the granule and allows for other beneficial properties to added to the particle, such as anti-microbial properties. (Column 6, Lines 24-45). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to apply the claimed ceramic coating with a pigment to the heat-treated granules of Teng.
Regarding Claim 13, Teng teaches the organic coating is asphalt. (Paragraph 0010-0011; Claim 12 of Teng).
Regarding Claim 14, Teng teaches the heat-treated aggregate is expanded shale. (Paragraph 0010).
Regarding Claim 15, Teng teaches the construction article is a shingle (Paragraph 0018) Teng teaches the heat-treated granules are roofing granules and are pushed into asphalt, partially embedded. (Paragraph 0025-0027; Abstract).
Regarding Claim 18, Teng teaches the heat-treated porous aggregate can be partially embedded into the prime region of the shingle (Paragraph 0010, 0025-0027; Abstract).
Regarding Claim 19-20, Teng does not specifically teach the construction article has a faster water desorption or reduced wet time relative to a comparative construction article, where the comparative construction article comprise additional granules having a moisture absorption of less than five percent but not the heat-treated, porous, mineral-based aggregate having a moisture absorption of at least seven weight percent by weight.
However, the instant Specification states that a heat-treated porous mineral aggregate having an absorption of at least seven percent by weight will have the claimed property or faster water desorption and reduced wet time relative to the comparative construction article. Thus, as Teng, ECSCI and Pinault teaches the claimed construction article with the claimed porous aggregate as the claimed roofing granule, then it would reasonable to one with ordinary skill in the art to expect the claimed invention and construction material of Teng, ESCSI and Pinault to have the same properties, including the faster water desorption and reduced wet time compared to a comparative construction article.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teng, ESCSI and Pinault, in further view of Panzarella et al. (US 2018/0194684 A1)
Regarding Claim 9, Teng does not specifically teach the heat-treated granules have the claimed Abrasion Resistance.
Panzarella teaches roofing granules (Abstract) having an Abrasion Resistance of Roofing Granules measured using the Asphalt Roofing Manufacturer's Association (ARMA), titled Abrasion Resistance of Roofing Granules, ARMA Granule Test Procedures Manual of not greater than 6% is suitable for commercial use. (Paragraph 0059-0060, 0138). This overlaps the claimed range of less than 3%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the Abrasion Resistance range of the heat-treated granules taught by Teng to the claimed range in order for the heat-treated granules to be able to match current commercial granule performance.
Claims 10-11 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teng, ESCSI, and Pinault, in further view of 3M (NPL)
Regarding Claim 10-11, Teng teaches a blend of the colored light weight roofing granules, as discussed in Claim 1, blended with an additional roofing granule. (Paragraph 0010, 0026, 0036).
Teng does not specifically teach the additional granules have a moisture absorption of less than 5 wt% and have one of the claimed coatings. Teng teaches the additional roofing granule can provide weathering, aesthetics and/or coloring. (Paragraph 0026), can have a specific gravity of at least 2.5 and a bulk density of 80-120 lb/ft3.
3M teaches 3M CLASSIC GRANULES which have a bulk density of 91-97 lb/ft3 and a specific gravity of 2.55-2.7 along with a ceramic pigmented coat. 3M teaches these granules provide weatherability and color to the shingle. (Page 1). Thus, as Teng teaches suitable physical ranges for the desired additional roofing granule and desired physical properties and 3M teaches 3M CLASSIC GRANULES that meet the desired range as well as provided weatherability and coloring, then it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use the claimed roofing granule taught by 3M in Teng. While 3M does not teach the moisture absorption, the instant Specification states 3M CLASSIC GRANULES will have moisture absorption within the claimed range.
Regarding Claim 16-17, Teng teaches a blend of the colored light weight roofing granules, as discussed in Claim 12/15, blended with an additional roofing granule. (Paragraph 0010, 0026, 0036).
Teng does not specifically teach the additional granules have a moisture absorption of less than 5 wt% and have one of the claimed coatings. Teng teaches the additional roofing granule can provide weathering, aesthetics and/or coloring. (Paragraph 0026), can have a specific gravity of at least 2.5 and a bulk density of 80-120 lb/ft3.
3M teaches 3M CLASSIC GRANULES which have a bulk density of 91-97 lb/ft3 and a specific gravity of 2.55-2.7 along with a ceramic pigmented coat. 3M teaches these granules provide weatherability and color to the shingle. (Page 1). Thus, as Teng teaches suitable physical ranges for the desired additional roofing granule and desired physical properties and 3M teaches 3M CLASSIC GRANULES that meet the desired range as well as provided weatherability and coloring, then it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use the claimed roofing granule taught by 3M in Teng. While 3M does not teach the moisture absorption, the instant Specification states 3M CLASSIC GRANULES will have moisture absorption within the claimed range.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered.
Applicant argues the ceramic coated particles of Teng, ESCSI and Pinault would not have the claimed moisture absorption. This argument is found unpersuasive, as ESCSI teaches a suitable moisture absorption range for expanded slate, expanded slate or expanded clay and a benefit for this moisture absorption range, lower surface moisture because the higher moisture absorption of particle draws moisture into the interior of the particle. Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the moisture range of the roofing granule to the range taught by ESCSI, even after the coating, to reduce surface moisture against whatever the lightweight particle is being applied to.
Applicant argues Teng does not teach a mixture of granules, as Teng teaches two different types of particles in two different regions. This argument is found unpersuasive. Teng teaches non-lightweight/non-low density granules can be applied to the prime region (Paragraph 0026, 0030), as well as colored granules of low density. (Paragraph 0010). Thus, Teng teaches a blend of particles within the same region, the prime region and forming a blend.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 9:30am-3:30pm, 8:30PM-10:30PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571) 270-1547. 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 Zhang/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
