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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 01/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected claims, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/29/2026
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) 1-4, 6-8, 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani et al. (US 4767725) in view of Ogawa et al. (US 2004/0087429).
Regarding claims 1-4, 7-8, Mizutani discloses crystallized glass-ceramic molded product having a glass matrix and crystallized calcium fluoride and fluormica dispersed therein (abstract). By the crystallizing heat-treatment, the amount of the calcium fluoride produced in the frit is greater than 70% of the calcium compounds produced as mentioned above (col. 10, lines 35-40). The constituent materials for producing glass to be used as a standard are those for producing borosilicate glass. For instance, they may be the constituents used for making plate glass, bottle glass or lighting glass, or other ordinary kinds of glasses. Standard constituent materials to be used are SiO.sub.2 --Al.sub.2 O.sub.3 --B.sub.2 O.sub.3 --K.sub.2 O--Na.sub.2 O--(CaO) which are ordinary glass compositions. As occasion demands, P.sub.2 O.sub.5, ZnO, BaO, PbO, Li.sub.2 O, TiO.sub.2, ZrO.sub.2, etc. are selectively added therein (col. 5, lines 5-15). The size of the crystal thereof is as fine as 0.1 mm or below (col. 10, lines 45-50).
However, Mizutani fails to disclose glass comprising predetermined weight ratio of Ca to Si.
Whereas, Ogawa discloses bioactive glass having a composition substantially comprising 30 to 60 mol % of CaO, 40 to 70 mol % of SiO.sub.2 and 20 mol % or less of Na.sub.2O has low glass transition temperature, and/or crystallization temperature, and a sintered calcium phosphate glass obtained by using the bioactive glass as a sintering aid has excellent biocompatibility, mechanical strength and sinterability (abstract), by converting CaO:SiO2 mol% to weight ratio, it comes out to 0.40:1 to 1.40:1 weight ratio of CaO:SiO2 and by converting to elemental Ca:Si weight ratio as claimed, the range is 0.61:1 to 2.14:1 which overlaps the claimed range.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include Ca to Si in glass matrix of Mizutani at a ratio of 0.61:1 to 2.14:1 as taught by Ogawa motivated by the desire to have excellent biocompatibility, mechanical strength.
While there is no disclosure that the crystallized glass-ceramic molded product is a fluorite synthetic stone as presently claimed, applicants attention is drawn to MPEP 2111.02 which states that “if the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction”. Further, MPEP 2111.02 states that statements in the preamble reciting the purpose or intended use of the claimed invention must be evaluated to determine whether the purpose or intended use results in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. Only if such structural difference exists, does the recitation serve to limit the claim. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
It is the examiner’s position that the preamble does not state any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations and further that the purpose or intended use, i.e. a fluorite synthetic stone, recited in the present claims does not result in a structural difference between the presently claimed invention and the prior art Mizutani and further that the prior art structure which is a glass-ceramic molded product identical to that set forth in the present claims is capable of performing the recited purpose or intended use.
Regarding claim 6, Mizutani discloses crystallized glass-ceramic molded product having a glass matrix and crystallized calcium fluoride and fluormica dispersed therein (abstract), as calcium fluoride is dispersed in glass matrix, therefore it would be obvious that glass matrix is partially fluorinated.
Regarding claim 11, Mizutani does not explicitly disclose glass matrix comprises C, CaCO3, S and P, so it would intrinsically meet the claim limitation of being devoid from glass matrix product.
Regarding claim 12, Mizutani does not explicitly disclose the glass matrix comprising binder, so it would intrinsically meet the claim limitation.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani et al. (US 4767725) in view of Ogawa et al. (US 2004/0087429) as applied to claim 1, further in view of JP 4549029.
Regarding claim 5, Mizutani fails to disclose that the glass matrix comprises Ca-Si-O compound selected from Ca2SiO3 and Ca2SiO4.
Whereas, JP’029 discloses glass-ceramic composition and a glass-ceramic sintered body that are most suitable for a wiring board and the like applied to a package for semiconductor element storage, a multilayer wiring board, and the like, and a method for producing the same (abstract). The glass-ceramic composition of the present invention comprises 30 to 55% by mass of SiO..sub.2 and 15-40 mass% Al.sub.2O.sub.33 to 25 wt% MgO, 2 to 15 wt% ZnO, and 2 to 15 wt% B.sub.2O.sub.3When,010 mass%ofCaO, SrO, BaO, ZrO.sub.2, SnO.sub.2And at least one selected from the group of rare earth element oxides,00.1 mass%ofPbO,00.1 mass%ofA.sub.260 to 94% by mass of glass powder composed of O (A: alkali metal), 0.5 to 20% by mass of cordierite powder, 5 to 20% by mass of alumina powder, and CaSiO.sub.3, CaZrO.sub.3, Ca.sub.2SiO.sub.4 (para 0014).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include Ca.sub.2SiO.sub.4 as taught by JP’029 in the glass matrix of Mizutani motivated by the desire to have excellent thermal resistance.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani et al. (US 4767725) in view of Ogawa et al. (US 2004/0087429) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Oguri et al. (US 2002/0032115).
Regarding claim 9, Mizutani fails to disclose that the glass matrix product further comprising SiO2 crystals dispersed in the glass matrix.
Whereas, Oguri discloses high temperature oxidation resistant coating performs a self-repairing function of self-repairing the cracks under a heated environment and has low catalytic properties. The high temperature oxidation resistant coating is prepared by dispersing silicate particles containing a composite oxide consisting of an oxide of a lanthanoide series rare earth element including yttrium and silicon oxide into a glass-based matrix (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include silicon oxide as taught by Oguri in the glass matrix of Mizutani motivated by the desire to be excellent in its resistance to oxidation under high temperatures.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani et al. (US 4767725) in view of Ogawa et al. (US 2004/0087429) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Larsen et al. (JP 2000-235862).
Regarding claim 9, Mizutani fails to disclose that the glass matrix product further comprising SiO2 crystals dispersed in the glass matrix.
Whereas, Larsen discloses sealing material for a fuel cell employs a glass composition containing one kinds or more of compounds selected from a metal oxides of the groups I, II and III, a glass matrix having main component constituted of SiO2 and Al2O3, and a filler material dispersed uniformly into the glass matrix, where the filler material is one kind or more of heat-resistant compound particles selected from MgO-MgAl2O4 (English abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include MgO-MgAl2O4 as taught by Larsen in the glass matrix of Mizutani motivated by the desire to be excellent heat resistance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONAK C PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1142. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM-6:30PM (FLEX).
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, ALICIA CHEVALIER can be reached at 5712721490. 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.
/RONAK C PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights