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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment provides all new claims and examiner has provided rejections below.
Applicant's arguments filed 10/27/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants’ argument with regard to Guizzetti is not persuasive since the reference states to use surface modifiers (see Guizzetti “After the barrier layer is applied to the elastomer core, it may be heat treated above the melt temperature of the barrier material to create a continuous barrier layer by fusing overlapping or multiple barrier layers.”, “The cord was placed in a mold and the cord/mold assembly was placed in an oven at about 180.degree. C. for about 2 hours, melting the thermoplastic component of the composite film”, ).
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) 18-19, 22-23, 28, 30-31 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guizzetti et al (US. 20040157035A1). It is noted that Guizzetti teaches to have the gasket have surface modifications, see paragraph 0027 and 0029 (e.g. paragraph 0027, outer layer may alos include other conformable polymers such as ePTFE and foamed or cellular polymers such as polystyrene, vinyl, poly vinyl chloride, polyethylene and polypropylene; paragraph 0029, other suitable surface modification include plasma treating, flame treating and corona treating).
Guizzetti discloses a composite gasket for providing a seal between flange surfaces (e.g. intended use and the gasket of Guizzetti is capable of this, see MPEP 2113-2114 with regard to intended use), the gasket comprising a unitary construction of a compressible outer sheath (e.g. outer sheath 40) and an inner non-metallic insert (e.g. 20 and/or 30, see paragraph 0016, “In addition, the core may be made from foamed or cellular polymers such as polystyrene, vinyl, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP). The core may additionally consist of blends of the preferred materials, for example, a blend of PVC and nitrile rubber.” And also see paragraph 0017-0018), wherein the outer sheath is formed of a first fluoropolymer material including polytetrafluoroethylene (e.g. see paragraph 0027), and the inner, non-metallic insert is formed of a second fluoropolymer material that is different from the first fluoropolymer material in density or chemical structure (e.g. see paragraph 0017-0018) and wherein the inner insert is fully encased by and thermally bonded or fused to the outer sheath via an adhesive-free interface (e.g. as stated in claim 42 a process that forms thermally bonded or fused to the outer sheath) characterized by an intermingling of the first and second fluoropolymer materials, thereby not only unifying the insert and sheath to prevent movement of the insert relative to the sheath but also preventing the gasket from contaminating any adjacent fluids with adhesive (e.g. the gasket of Guizzetti is capable of being used in fluid assembly, intended use see MPEP 2113-2114). Wherein the first fluoropolymer is PTFE, porous PTFE, expanded PTFE, filled PTFE, microcellular PTFE, or a mixture thereof (e.g. paragraph 0020 or material of 30 and/or 40).
Regarding claim 19: Wherein the outer sheath is formed of expanded PTFE (e.g. paragraph 0027, the conformable outer may also include conformable polymers such as ePTFE) and the inner insert is formed of filled PTFE (e.g. paragraph 0017, “Less resilient or non-resilient core materials suitable for use in the present invention include but are not limited to plastics, such as PE, PP, PVC, PTFE, FEP, PFA, THV, ETFE, nylon, polysulfone, polyester, vinyl, and acrylic. The core materials may be cured or uncured, filled or unfilled.”).
Regarding claim 22: Wherein the insert has a non-uniform cross-section to create concentrated sealing stress (e.g. figure 4 shows this, 20 and 30 as core).
Regarding claim 23: Wherein the insert has an outer diameter approximately equal to that of the gasket (e.g. that would be case since the outer sheath is small in thickness).
Regarding claim 28: Guizzetti discloses acomposite gasket for sealing flange surfaces in chemically aggressive environments, comprising: a unitary construction of a first fluoropolymer including expanded PTFE (ePTFE), and a non-metallic insert formed of a second fluoropolymer including PTFE and a filler material, the insert fully encased by and thermally fused to the unitary construction via an adhesive-free interface to preclude floating of the insert within the unitary construction and contamination of adjacent fluids with adhesive (see rejection of claims above) and wherein the gasket is chemically compatibility with hydrochloric acid at concentrations exceeding about 20% at 85°C, and has a nominal leak rate of no more than about 0.10 mg/s/m at a compressive stress of less than or equal to about 4,350 psi (e.g. the gasket of Guizzetti is capable of this, intended use and/or method limitation given little or no patentable weight in an apparatus claim, see MPEP 2113-2114). It is further noted that the structure of the gasket is taught by Guizzetti and this is capable of being compatible with sealing hydrochloric acid environment.
Regarding claim 30: The gasket is configured for fiberglass reinforced plastic flanges (e.g. again intended use and the structure of the gasket is taught by Guizzetti and is capable being used in flanges, intended use see MPEP 2113-2114).
Regarding claim 31: Wherein the insert has an outer diameter approximately equal to that of the gasket (see rejection of claims above).
Regarding claim 33: Wherein the insert has a modulus of elasticity of at least 1,875 MPa at 20 MPa and the unitary construction has a modulus of elasticity less than that of the insert (e.g. this would be the case since the structure of claim 25 is taught).
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) 20 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guizzetti in view of Takaya et al (JP2014004743A).
Guizzetti discloses the claimed invention except for the filler being what is stated in claim 20 and more specifically silicon carbide in claim 29. Takaya discloses a polytetrafluoroethylene base composite structure having a filler that is silicon carbide (“the raw material particles PTFE particles and modified PTFE particles are carbon fiber, glass fiber, aramid fiber, boron fiber, What mix | blended reinforcing fibers, such as a metal fiber and a silicon carbide fiber, can also be used.”, see Takaya). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the filler be one of material stated in claims with reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. It is noted that one skilled in the art would provide filler based on what stiffness the insert may desire or what temperature the seal or gasket must withstand.
Barna (US.5492336 or 5551706) states (“The particulate filler may be an inorganic filler which includes metals, semi-metals, metal oxides, carbon, graphite, and glass.”) and Gore et al (WO9613676) states (“PTFE material with a filler that supplies some limited rigidity. Examples of fillers placed into some gasket materials that may supply some limited rigidity include glass microspheres and inorganic microspheres, such as silica and fiberglass. While limited additional rigidity can be supplied in this manner, these fillers tend to diminish the overall performance of the gasket material- limiting chemical or temperature resistance or other qualities.”).
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guizzetti in view of Hisano et al (US 20030230859A1).
Guizzetti discloses the invention as claimed above but fails to disclose the gasket having a rectangular or square or triangle shape. Hisano discloses an annular shape that is circular in one embodiment (figure 9) and a gasket having a shape that is rectangular or square or triangle (figures 12-13). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the gasket shape of Guizzetti to be rectangular or square or triangle as taught by Hisano, with reasonable expectation of success to seal square openings in flanges or elements (e.g. see figure 13 and paragraph 0062 of Hisano).
Claim(s) 24-27 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guizzetti in view of Pitolaj (US. 20180340052A1).
Guizzetti discloses the invention as claimed above but fails to disclose the dimensions of the insert having a cross-sectional width of 0.125 inches or less and the gasket having a cross-sectional width no more than about 0.093 inches. Pitolaj discloses gasket being made of many dimensions including the gasket having a cross-sectional width no more than about 0.093 inches, which would also form the insert smaller than 0.125 inches (paragraph 0024, 1/16 inch or paragraph 0025, 1/8 inch). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the gasket of Guizzetti to have the dimension as taught by Pitolaj with reasonable expectation of success to seal flange gaps that are 1/16 to 1/8 of an inch (e.g. inherent since the gasket having that size and also see reference of Pitolaj).
Regarding claim 27: Wherein the insert has a modulus of elasticity of at least 1,875 MPa at 20 MPa and the unitary construction has a modulus of elasticity less than that of the insert (e.g. this would be the case since the structure of claim 25 is taught).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Even if applicant claims the PTFE in independent claims and thermal bond of the two fluoropolymer, prior art provided on 892 would teach the invention (see reference of Ragsadle paragraph 0008 and description of figure 4 in view of teaching provided by references of Jones or Guizetti or Barna et al or Dolan et al or Hamilton et al to have a core made of fluoropolymer that is densified or different fluoropolymer than another fluoropolymer). Furthermore applicant or assignee is well aware of gasket that can be made non-annular or annular or any other shapes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-7060. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am to 4:00pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached on 571-272-8322. 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.
/VISHAL A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675