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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 08, 2026, has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (US 2008/0287627 A1) in view of Sano (US 2011/0034639 A1), Goto (J. Vac. Sci. Techol. 2020, 38, 1, pp. 1-7), and Ueki (US 2013/0020769 A1). Hertz (A fluoroelastomer compendium for the non-metallic practitioner, 2017, pp. 1-18) is cited as an evidentiary reference.
Regarding claim 1, Noguchi teaches a crosslinked perfluoroelastomeric composition and molded articles formed therefrom (Abstract), wherein said compositions have a first curable perfluoropolymer and a second curable perfluoropolymer, both of which contain perfluoroalkylvinyl ether monomers (Abstract).
Noguchi teaches the incorporation of optional fillers in amounts up to 30 parts per 100 parts of the curable perfluoropolymer resins ([0099]), curatives including organic peroxides ([0053]) in amounts ranging between 0.3 and 10 parts per 100 parts of perfluoropolymer resins ([0088]), and a crosslinking agent, which preferably comprises a material which is crosslinkable with the cure site groups present in the perfluoropolymers in the formulation ([0134]), in amounts ranging from 0.3 to 10 parts per 100 parts by weight of the elastomer ([0147]). In each case, the amounts taught by Noguchi overlap or are identical to the claimed amounts, establishing prima facie cases of obviousness.
Noguchi differs from claim 1 because it is silent with regard to the specific incorporation of 2,5-dimethyl2-,5-bis(tert-butylperoxy)hexane and/or triallyl isocyanurate.
In the same field of endeavor, Sano teaches a fluororubber sealing material (Abstract), containing an organic peroxide crosslinker ([0050]) and a polyfunctional monomer for crosslinking ([0056]-[0057]), wherein the organic peroxide may be of 2,5-dimethyl-2,5-bis(tert-butylperoxy)hexane ([0053]) and the polyfunctional monomer may be triallyl isocyanurate ([0058]). It is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known in the art as suitable for the same purpose (see MPEP 2144.06), and Noguchi and Sano are both directed to sealing materials (c.f. [0002] of Noguchi and Abstract of Sano). It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize 2,5-dimethyl2-,5-bis(tert-butylperoxy)hexane and triallyl isocyanurate within the formulation of Noguchi, as taught by Sano, as Sano recognizes them, respectively, as suitable organic peroxide / crosslinking materials for fluororubber compositions for sealing applications.
Noguchi is silent regarding the newly added limitation requiring the incorporation of a vinylidene fluoride structural unit. However, while Noguchi does specifically point out the incorporation of tetrafluoroethylene monomers (Abstract), Noguchi also contemplates that hydrogen may be included in the composition not only as a residual (i.e., as is described in [0047]), but also within monomers of nonpreferred embodiments wherein excellent het resistance is not an important factor (i.e., as is described in [0055]). Finally, Noguchi teaches that the inventive composition may be used to form O-rings (e.g., p. 21, claim 31).
In the same field of endeavor, Goto investigates the plasma resistance of O-ring elastomers (Abstract), comparing and contrasting FFKM and FKM elastomers, which are taught by Goto as differing in the presence or absence of C-H bonds (versus exclusively C-F bonds, see Goto p. 1, Introduction section). In this same passage, Goto specifically teaches that high thermal stability is provided by the C-F bonds, which is similar to PTFE (a perfluorinated monomer). Goto additionally teaches that FFKMs are higher cost than FKMs. FKM polymers are fluororubbers based on vinylidene fluoride alongside additional polyfluoroalkyl/polyfluoroalkoxy groups, with or without a cure site monomer (c.f. Hertz p. 4). It is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known in the art as suitable for the same purpose (see MPEP 2144.06). Therefore, it would have been obvious to substitute vinylidene fluoride in place of tetrafluoroethylene within Noguchi (thereby substituting an FKM polymer in place of an FFKM polymer), as Goto teaches FKM polymers as suitable for O-ring formation, and Noguchi is directed towards the formation of O-rings. The composition of Noguchi as modified by Goto would therefore include vinylidene fluoride monomers (instead of tetrafluoroethylene monomers) and would thereby meet the claimed limitation requiring the same.
Noguchi is silent regarding the newly added limitation requiring the incorporation of the specific perfluoroalkoxy vinyl ether structure as claimed. Noguchi does, however, specifically teach the incorporation of perfluoroalkylvinylethers which include alkyl or alkoxy groups, such as perfluoromethylvinyl ether (PMVE, [0052]).
In the same field of endeavor, Ueki teaches sealing members obtained from molding an FFKM polymer (abstract), wherein the sealing member may be an O-ring ([0056]). Ueki teaches that the perfluoroelastomer used therein may include perfluoroalkyl vinyl ethers (PAVEs), including PMVE and perfluoromethoxyvinyl ether (PMOVE, [0040]). It is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known in the art as suitable for the same purpose (See MPEP 2144.06), and Noguchi teaches the incorporation of PMVE. It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to substitute the PMVE of Noguchi with PMOVE as taught by Ueki, as Ueki teaches PMOVE as a suitable alternative to PMVE, and because Noguchi specifically indicates that the class of perfluoroalkoxyvinyl ethers are suitable as monomers in the inventive polymer. PMOVE reads on the claimed structural unit because it is identical to the claimed structure wherein all “X” are fluorine and “Rf” is -CF3.
In so doing, the composition of Noguchi as modified would meet all of the claimed limitations.
Regarding claims 2-3, Noguchi as modified is silent with regard to the claimed glass transition temperature range and peak shape. Nevertheless, Noguchi as modified teaches a composition which is structurally identical to the claimed composition, having all of the same components. Products of identical chemical compositions cannot have mutually exclusive properties. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, a prima facie case of obviousness has been established. See MPEP 2112.01. The claimed glass transition temperature range and peak shape characteristics will therefore necessarily be present in Noguchi, as applied above.
Regarding claim 5, Noguchi as modified is silent with regard to the claimed swollen volume percentage characteristics. Nevertheless, Noguchi as modified teaches a composition which is structurally identical to the claimed composition, having all of the same components. Products of identical chemical compositions cannot have mutually exclusive properties. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, a prima facie case of obviousness has been established. See MPEP 2112.01. The swollen volume percentage characteristics will therefore necessarily be present in Noguchi, as applied above.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Noguchi teaches the molding and formation of sealing members, including O-rings, from cured versions of the inventive composition ([0044]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks, filed June 8, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3 and 5-7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Noguchi in view of Sano, Goto, and Ueki (US 2013/0020769 A1), as described above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA CALEB BLEDSOE whose telephone number is (703)756-5376. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. 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, Robert Jones can be reached at 571-270-7733. 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.
/JOSHUA CALEB BLEDSOE/Examiner, Art Unit 1762
Prosecution Insights