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 arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 3 and 4 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tahara et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0380213) in view of Koizumi et al. (JP 2017012970).
Regarding claim 1, Tahara et al. teaches a boron nitride powder which can be used at a high filling rate and which can be used to manufacture a resin material with excellent thermal (heat) conductivity (paragraph 1). Tahara et al. teaches a boron nitride powder having an agglomerate structure in which scaly primary particles of hexagonal boron nitride aggregate to form secondary particles, where the major axis length of the primary particles is 10 μm, and the median size of the secondary particles is 40 μm which meets the limitation of hexagonal boron nitride powder comprising scaly primary particles of hexagonal boron nitride (paragraph 57). Tahara et al. teaches subjecting a boron nitride powder having a hexagonal structure to a plasma treatment in an atmosphere containing either or both of CO2 and CO in a total of 5 vol% or more and under a pressure of 1 Pa or more and 100 Pa or less which meets a broad and reasonable interpretation of plasma treatment method of plasma-treating a hexagonal boron nitride powder under reduced pressure (paragraphs 23 and 44). Tahara et al. teaches plasma treatment was performed by feeding 20 g of the raw boron nitride powder into a plasma irradiation device (paragraph 58). Tahara et al. does not teach the parts of the device such as a treatment container
Koizumi et al. teaches plasma powder processing apparatus (1) comprises cylindrical chamber (2) which is arranged sideways, cylindrical powder storage container (3) which can withdraw/insert in and out of one side of chamber, and can accommodate powder inside, pressure reduction unit which holds chamber and powder storage container from atmospheric pressure to low pressure, gas supply unit (7) which supplies gas for plasma production in chamber and powder storage container, and electrode (51a, 51b) which generates reduced pressure high frequency plasma by gas (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the plasma powder apparatus taught by Koizumi et al. for the method of treating scaly h-BN taught by Tahara et al. because it reduces the costs of research and development.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUINEVER S GREGORIO whose telephone number is (571)270-5827. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 11 am - 9 pm.
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, Coris Fung can be reached at 571-270-5713. 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.
/GUINEVER S GREGORIO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732 06/09/2026
Prosecution Insights