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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 07/27/2023, 08/01/2023, 10/02/2024, 02/04/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I (consisting of claims 1-5) in the reply filed on 02/24/2026 is acknowledge.
Applicant alleged that there would be no burden of search, specifically, Applicant stated: “It is respectfully submitted that the subject matter of all claims is sufficiently related that a thorough search for the subject matter of any one Group of claims would encompass a search for the subject matter of the remaining claims. Thus, it is respectfully submitted that the search and examination of the entire application could be made without serious burden.”, see details on page 1 of the Response to Election/Restriction filed 02/24/2026.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Restriction for examination purposes is proper because all the inventions listed in the Requirement for Restriction/Election dated 01/12/2026 are independent or distinct for the reasons given in the Requirement for Restriction/Election dated 01/12/2026 and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
(A) Separate classification thereof: This shows that each invention has attained recognition in the art as a separate subject for inventive effort, and also a separate field of search. Patents need not be cited to show separate classification.
(B) A separate status in the art when they are classifiable together: Even though they are classified together, each invention can be shown to have formed a separate subject for inventive effort when the examiner can show a recognition of separate inventive effort by inventors. Separate status in the art may be shown by citing patents which are evidence of such separate status, and also of a separate field of search.
(C) A different field of search: Where it is necessary to search for one of the inventions in a manner that is not likely to result in finding art pertinent to the other invention(s) (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries, a different field of search is shown, even though the two are classified together. The indicated different field of search must in fact be pertinent to the type of subject matter covered by the claims. Patents need not be cited to show different fields of search.
Therefore, the Applicant’s argument that there is no burden of search is not persuasive.
Accordingly, the restriction requirement is deemed proper and therefore, Group II (consisting of claim 6) is withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a pair of electrodes” in lines 4-5. It is unclear what is meant by this limitation because claim 1 previously recites “a pair of electrodes” in line 3. Therefore, it is unclear if the limitation “a pair of electrodes” recited in lines 4-5 of claim 1 refers to the limitation “a pair of electrodes” recited previously in line 3 of claim 1; or the limitation “a pair of electrodes” recited in lines 4-5 of claim 1 refers to a different pair of electrodes. For examination purposes, the limitation “a pair of electrodes” recited in lines 4-5 of claim 1 will be interpreted as to refer to the limitation “a pair of electrodes” recited previously in line 3 of claim 1.
Claims 2-5 are rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oshima (JP 2006335624 A, Translation is attached).
Regarding claim 1, Oshima discloses a method (Oshima Translated Abstract & Fig.1) comprising:
moving a fiber bundle (fiber 100 comprises multiple carbon nanotubes, Oshima Fig.1, Oshima Translated Document on page 4 – paragraph 5 discloses: “The present embodiment provides a manufacturing method in which a carbon nanotube fiber in a fiber is chemically bonded to each other by applying electricity while heating to a fiber (carbon nanotube fiber) made of spun carbon nanotubes. is there.”) to length direction (as shown in Oshima Fig.1 & Oshima Translated Abstract discloses: “The spun carbon nanotube fiber 100 is passed through an electric oven 12 to be heated using 2 bobbins 10 and 11”) so that conductive surface of the fiber bundle (carbon nanotube fiber 100, Oshima Fig.1) is in contact with at least a pair of electrodes (pair of electrodes 14, Oshima Fig.1) (it is known that carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are highly conductive, and Oshima Translated Document on page 5 – paragraph 2 discloses: “the electrode 14 and the carbon nanotube fiber 100 are sufficiently in contact with each other in the protective tube 13 by adjusting the positions of both the bobbins 10 and 11 and the rotational torque. Thereby, a current flows through the fiber 100 via the pair of electrodes 14 by the power source 15.”; therefore, conductive surface of the carbon nanotube fiber 100 is in contact with pair of electrodes 14); and
heating the fiber bundle (carbon nanotube fiber 100, Oshima Fig.1) by applying a voltage between at least a pair of electrodes (pair of electrodes 14, Oshima Fig.1) (Oshima Translated Document from the last paragraph on page 5 to the first paragraph on page 6 discloses: “while heating the fiber 100 with the electric furnace 12 as a heating means, an electric current is sent with respect to the fiber 100 of the state heated via the pair of electrodes 14 and the power supply 15 as an electricity supply means. Here, the heating temperature can be, for example, about 500 ° C. to 1300 ° C. The contact portions of the carbon nanotubes in the fiber 100 are chemically bonded to each other by energy generated by heating and energization.”, and Oshima Translated Document on page 2 – paragraph 11 discloses: “by heating, the entire carbon nanotube fiber is activated to a certain extent for the reaction of chemical bonding, and further, Joule heat is applied to this contact portion by energization utilizing the high resistance of the physical contact portion described above. To generate chemical bonds.”; therefore, Oshima discloses applying voltage between the pair of electrodes 14 to pass current through the carbon nanotube fiber 100, whereby Joule heating is generated within the carbon nanotube fiber 100, thereby heating the carbon nanotube fiber 100);
wherein at least either electrode in the pair of electrodes (pair of electrodes 14, Oshima Fig.1) has an aggregating structure (groove 14a, Oshima Fig.2a) that aggregates the fiber bundle (carbon nanotube fiber 100, Oshima Fig.1) while being in contact with an outer surface of the fiber bundle (outer surface of the carbon nanotube fiber 100, Oshima Fig.1) (It is noted that the Instant Application defines “an aggregating structure that aggregates the fiber bundle” as “The fiber bundle is in a state of being aggregated by the aggregating structure of the electrodes (a state in which fibers that constitute the fiber bundle are converged in close contact with each other). This allows the fiber bundle to maintain a state of stably contacting the electrodes (aggregating structure) over a wide area without fluttering even during the movement between the electrodes.” in Par.0012 of the Instant Application. In this case, the prior art Oshima groove 14a of each electrode 14 positions and retains the carbon nanotube fiber 100 in stable contact with the electrodes 14, thereby ensuring continuous current flow through the carbon nanotube fiber 100; therefore, the groove 14a aggregates the carbon nanotube fiber 100 while being in contact with outer surface of the carbon nanotube fiber 100).
Regarding claim 2, Oshima discloses the method set forth in claim 1, Oshima also discloses:
wherein the aggregating structure (groove 14a, Oshima Fig.2a) is either cylindrical-shaped or a trench with a decreasing width to depth direction (It is noted that the limitation “either cylindrical-shaped or a trench with a decreasing width to depth direction” is in alternative form. In this case, Oshima discloses cylindrical-shaped as shown in Oshima Fig.2a).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshima (JP 2006335624 A, Translation is attached) in view of Inoue (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0002794 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Oshima discloses the method set forth in claim 1, Oshima also discloses:
wherein the electrode (electrodes 14, Oshima Figs.1 & 2a) having the aggregating structure (each electrode 14 has groove 14a, Oshima Fig.2a) is a rotating body (as shown in Oshima Figs.1 & 2a, and Oshima Translated Document on page 5 – paragraph 4 also teaches: “a pair of electrode 14 is made into a roller shape in order to enable such rotation”)
Oshima does not explicitly disclose:
the aggregating structure is a trench located in outer surface of the rotating body and width of the trench decreases to rotational axis direction of the rotating body.
Inoue teaches a roller (roller 4, Inoue Fig.7A) having an aggregating structure (groove 20, Inoue Fig.7A):
the aggregating structure (groove 20, Inoue Fig.7A) is a trench (Inoue Fig.7A shows the groove 20 is a trench) located in outer surface of the rotating body (circumferential face 4A of the roller 4, Inoue Fig.7A) and width of the trench (groove 20, Inoue Fig.7A) decreases to rotational axis direction of the rotating body (body of the roller 4, Inoue Fig.7A) (as shown in Inoue Fig.7A & Inoue Par.0206 teaches: “the groove 20 can be dented to be a substantially letter-V shape from the circumferential face 4A of the roller 4, as shown in FIG. 7A, and can have a pair of inclined faces 20D. The pair of inclined faces 20D incline as they approach from the circumferential face 4A of the roller 4 to the inner side in diameter direction, so as to be closer to be an inner side in axial direction. The diameter direction-inner side end portion of the pair of inclined faces 20D are connected from each other.”; therefore, the width of the groove 20 decreases to rotational axis direction of the body of the roller 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention modify the method of Oshima, by making the groove to be V-shaped groove, as taught by Inoue, in order to center the carbon nanotube fiber because the V-shaped groove has converging walls that force the carbon nanotube fiber to be in center; thus, ensure precise alignment during continuous processing of the carbon nanotube fiber. Therefore, the modification enhances the consistency of electrical contact between the electrodes and the carbon nanotube fiber for delivering current to generate localized Joule heating, and thus, improve contact stability and process performance.
Regarding claim 4, Oshima in view of Inoue teaches the method set forth in claim 3, and also teaches:
wherein the trench (Inoue Fig.7A shows the groove 20 is a trench; as cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 3 above) has a sloping part (inclined faces 20D, Inoue Fig.7A) in outer surface side (outer surface side of the roller 4, Inoue Fig.7A).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshima (JP 2006335624 A, Translation is attached) in view of Jeong et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0069666 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Oshima discloses the method set forth in claim 1, Oshima does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the fiber bundle includes at least either a stabilized fiber, an infusibilized fiber or a pre-carbonized fiber.
Jeong teaches a method (Jeong Abstract & Fig.1):
wherein the fiber bundle includes at least either a stabilized fiber, an infusibilized fiber or a pre-carbonized fiber (It is noted that the limitation “at least either a stabilized fiber, an infusibilized fiber or a pre-carbonized fiber” is in alternative form; therefore, only one of these was required during examination. In this case, Jeong teaches a stabilized fiber because Jeong Par.0016 teaches: “stabilizing the carbon nanotube fibers dried in the step (b) through heat treatment at 100 to 400.degree. C. under air atmosphere”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention modify the method of Oshima, by adding the teaching of the fiber bundle includes stabilized fiber, as taught by Jeong, in order to improve mechanical strength and enhance electrical and thermal conductivity; and therefore, improve electrode energizing and chemical bonding efficiency, and prevent deformation.
Conclusion
The following prior art(s) made of record and not relied upon is/are considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Kim (U.S. Pub. No. 2010/0074834 A1) discloses an apparatus and a method for surface-treating a carbon fiber. The apparatus includes a plurality of electrode rollers transferring the carbon fiber by a rotational motion; and a power supply apparatus applying a voltage between the plurality of electrode rollers, wherein the carbon fiber moving between the plurality of electrode rollers is heated by applying the voltage between the plurality of electrode rollers.
Kumar et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0369426 A1) discloses a method of making a carbon fiber, carbon nanotubes (CNT) are mixed into a solution including polyacrylonitrile (PAN) so as to form a CNT/PAN mixture. At least one PAN/CNT fiber is formed from the mixture. A first predetermined electrical current is applied to the PAN/CNT fiber until the PAN/CNT fiber is a stabilized PAN/CNT fiber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAO TRAN-LE whose telephone number is (571) 272-7535. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 - 5:00 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, STEVEN CRABB can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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.
/THAO UYEN TRAN-LE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 04/29/2026
Prosecution Insights