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 .
Election/Restrictions
Restriction requirement mailed 04/01/2026 has been withdrawn due to applicant’s amendment.
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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitaura et al (JP 2016-120662).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Kitaura discloses a stampable sheet (0001) comprising polypropylene resin, i.e. thermoplastic resin, (0001, 0008), a flame retardant (0054) or phosphorus based antioxidant, i.e. flame retardant, (0057), acid modified copolymer, i.e. dispersant (0044), and glass or carbon fiber, i.e. inorganic fiber, (0031, 0038) wherein the inorganic fiber has a content of 3 to 60% by weight (0037) or 10 to 50 % by weight (0042) and the dispersant in an amount of 0.4 to 13 % by weight to obtain impact strength and strength of the resin composition (0052).
Kitaura does not disclose the dispersant has a content of more than 0 to 25 parts by mass or less based on 100 parts by mass of flame retardant. Since the instant specification is silent to unexpected results, the specific amount of dispersant is not considered to confer patentability to the claims. As the impact strength and the strength of the resin composition is a variable that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the amount of dispersant (0052), the precise amount would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed amount cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the amount of dispersant in the sheet to obtain the impact strength and the strength of the resin composition (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding claim 2, Kitaura discloses the stampable sheet of claim 1 wherein the dispersant is copolymer of olefin and unsaturated carboxylic acid (0044).
Regarding claims 3-4, Kitaura discloses the stampable sheet of claim 1 wherein the flame retardant is phosphorus based flame retardant, i.e. intumescent flame retardant, (0057).
Regarding claim 5, Kitaura discloses the stampable sheet of claim 1 wherein the inorganic fiber length is 0.1 to 20 mm or 5 mm or more, i.e. average length of 0.1 mm or more, (0008).
Regarding claim 7, Kitaura discloses the stampable sheet of claim 1 wherein the thermoplastic resin is polypropylene based resin and the polypropylene resin has a content of 40 to 97 % by weight (0008).
Regarding claim 8, Kitaura discloses the stampable sheet of claim 1 wherein the flame Kitaura is silent regarding flame retardant amount.
Since the instant specification is silent to unexpected results, the specific amount of the flame retardant is not considered to confer patentability to the claims. As the thermal stability and heat aging resistance is a variable that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the amount of flame retardant (0057), the precise amount would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed amount cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the amount of flame retardant in the sheet to obtain the thermal stability and heat aging resistance (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding claim 9, Kitaura discloses the stampable sheet of claim 1, obtained by impregnating mat consisting of the inorganic fiber with a resin composition of the thermoplastic resin, flame retardant and the dispersant (0009, 0064).
Regarding claim 10, Kitaura discloses the stampable sheet of claim 1, wherein the mat is produced by needle punching a swirl mat of a continuous glass or inorganic fiber (0010, 0041).
Regarding claim 11, Kitaura discloses a molded article obtained by stamping the stampable sheet of claim 1 (0011).
Regarding claim 12, Kitaura discloses a battery housing made of the molded article according to claim 11 (0012).
Regarding claim 13, Kitaura discloses the stampable sheet of claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic resin is polypropylene based resin and the polypropylene resin has a content of 40 to 97 % by weight (0008), the inorganic fiber has a content of 3 to 60% by weight (0037) or 10 to 50 % by weight (0042) and the dispersant in an amount of 0.4 to 13 % by weight to obtain impact strength and strength of the resin composition (0052).
Kitaura does not disclose the dispersant has a content of 0.01 o 10 parts by mass or less based on 100 parts by mass of flame retardant. Since the instant specification is silent to unexpected results, the specific amount of dispersant is not considered to confer patentability to the claims. As the impact strength and the strength of the resin composition is a variable that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the amount of dispersant (0052), the precise amount would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed amount cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the amount of dispersant in the sheet to obtain the impact strength and the strength of the resin composition (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding flame retardant content, as the thermal stability and heat aging resistance is a variable that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the amount of flame retardant (0057), the precise amount would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed amount cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the amount of flame retardant in the sheet to obtain the thermal stability and heat aging resistance (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMIR SHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-1143. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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.
/SAMIR SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights