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
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kodokian (US 5762741), in view of Sakane (US 4707387)
With respect to claim 1, Kodokian discloses a composite material comprising a base layer comprising a fluoropolymer such as PTFE and comprising fibers - a layer corresponding to a second article (col. 3, lines 1-41), wherein the thickness of the base layer is 3.17 mm (col. 11, lines 8-10), a polytetrafluoroethylene cover layer – a first article (col. 3, lines 1-13), wherein the thickness of the cover layer is 3.17 mm (col. 11, lines 8-10), and an intermediate layer which can comprise the same polymer as the first and/or second article (col. 3, lines 43-63). The thicknesses of the base layer and the cover layer are within the recited range. Kodokian is silent with respect to the base layer comprising PFA and specifically carbon fibers and the intermediate layer comprising PFA. Sakane discloses that PTFE and PFA are interchangeable in articles that are resistant to chemical environments (col. 1, lines 26-29, 64-68). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the second article of Kodokian of PFA as it is known in the art of articles having corrosion resistance to chemicals that PTFA and PFA are interchangeable (Sakane, col. 1, lines 26-29), the article of Kodokian having corrosion resistance (col. 1, lines 19-25). It has been held to select a known material based on its suitability for its intended use to be an obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). Since Kodokian discloses that the intermediate layer comprises the same polymer as the second article (col. 3, 43-63), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the intermediate layer of PFA. Regarding the fibers of the base layer being carbon fibers, Kodokian discloses an embodiment wherein a layer of PFA includes carbon fibers (col. 9, lines 20-23), thus, since Kodokian discloses fibers in the second article (col. 3, lines 40-41), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include carbon fibers in the base layer, as Kodokian discloses that carbon fibers are suitable with PFA in composite materials.
As to claim 2, Kodokian and Sakane teach the material of claim 1. Since the references teach the composition of the base layer and the cover layer as recited in claim 1, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the composite material according to the references is capable to perform as intended, that is, the coefficients of linear expansion of the layers satisfy claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Kodokian and Sakane teach the material of claim 1. The claim defines the product by how the product is made, thus, claim 3 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps (MPEP 2113). In the instant case the recited steps imply the structure of claim 3. The references teach the structure.
With respect to claim 4, Kodokian and Sakane teach the material of claim 1. Kodokian discloses the thickness of the intermediate layer of 250 µm (col. 11, lines 8-14). The thickness of the intermediate layer is within the recited range. Overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on Dec. 17, 2025 have been fully considered.
In view of the recent amendment 35 USC 112(b) rejections with respect to claims 2-3 have been withdrawn.
The Applicant argued there is no cover or base layer in Kodokian, especially of the thicknesses now claimed. The Examiner notes Kodokian discloses a base layer - a layer corresponding to a second article (col. 3, lines 1-41), wherein the thickness of the base layer is 3.17 mm (col. 11, lines 8-10), and a cover layer – a first article (col. 3, lines 1-13), wherein the thickness of the cover layer is 3.17 mm (col. 11, lines 8-10). The thicknesses of the base layer and the cover layer are within the recited range.
The Applicant argued in Kodokian there is no teaching of use of specific intermediate layer comprising perfluoroalkoxy alkane in combination with the base layer comprising perfluoroalkoxy alkane and cover layer comprising PTFE. The Examiner notes Kodokian discloses polytetrafluoroethylene cover layer – the first article (col. 3, lines 10-13), the intermediate layer can comprise the same polymer as the first and/or second article (col. 3, lines 43-63). Sakane discloses that PTFE and PFA are interchangeable in articles that are resistant to chemical environments (col. 1, lines 26-29, 64-68), thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the second article of Kodokian of PFA as it is known in the art of articles having corrosion resistance to chemicals that PTFA and PFA are interchangeable (Sakane, col. 1, lines 26-29), the article of Kodokian having corrosion resistance (col. 1, lines 19-25).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOANNA PLESZCZYNSKA whose telephone number is (571)270-1617. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~ 11:30-8.
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, Maria Veronica Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
/Joanna Pleszczynska/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights