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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendments filed on 09/09/2026 have been entered. Claims 1-6 are currently under examination on the merits.
Any rejections and/or objections made in the previous Office action and not repeated below are hereby withdrawn.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stoeppelmann et al (US 2008/0167415, ‘415 hereafter) as evidenced by Suzuki et al (JP 2014040555, of record, ‘555 hereafter).
Regarding claims 1-6, ‘415 discloses a glass fiber-reinforced molded article ([0001]) comprising a glass reinforcing material being a flat cross-section fiber having a ratio of major axis to mimer axis in a range of 2 to 5, satisfying the presently claimed ratio ranges of claims 1 and 3 ([0028]), and a thermoplastic resin being a polyamide ([0023]-[0026]) satisfying present claims 4-6; wherein the content of the flat cross-section glass fiber is in a range of 40 to 80% by mass ([0027]-[0028], [0052]), specifically 49.3% or 64.6% by mass as in the example (Examples 1-3. Table 1), and the major axis of the flat cross-section glass fiber is in a range of 6 to 40 microns, satisfying the presently claimed major axis ranges as in claims 1 and 2 ([0061]). ‘415 does not expressly disclose that the flat cross-section glass fiber has a proportion having a length of 50 to 100 microns with respect to total number of the flat cross-section glass fiber having a length of 50 micron or more in the glass fiber-reinforced molded article in the article, where the content, the major axis and the proportion satisfy the formula (1) and formula (2) as recited in the claims 1 and 2. However, ‘415 teaches that the a glass fiber-reinforced molded article is formed from a glass fiber-reinforced composition by using chopped strands of glass fiber having a length of about 2 to 50 mm, specifically 3 mm as in examples ([0052], [0122]) by melt-kneading the glass fiber and thermoplastic resin in a twin-screw extruder at a screw rotation speed of 150 to 200 rpm ([0124]-[0125]), which renders the glass reinforcing resin composition being significantly similar to the glass reinforcing resin composition being processed in the present application (see Examples of the present application, Table 1, screw rotation speed is in 100 to 200 rpm, the length of glass fiber in the composition depends on screw rotation speed (kneading speed), as evidenced by ‘555, see [0058] of ‘555); therefore, it is reasonable to expect that the proportion of the length of 50 to 100 microns of the glass fiber satisfying presently claimed range and the formula (1) and formula (2) with respect to content, major axis and proportion of the fiber glass in the glass fiber-reinforced molded article of ‘415. In addition, ‘555 also teaches that the length of glass fiber can be readily adjusted by the kneading speed during compounding the glass fiber reinforcing composition before forming the glass fiber reinforcing article ([0058]), thus a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize the relative portion of fiber lengths as presently claimed and would have been motivated to do so in order to minimize dimensional anisotropy of the glass fiber-reinforced molded article as taught by ‘555 ([0008] and Table 2, shrinkage ratio of MD to TD as high as 0.6, close but better than the Examples of present application).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/12/2023 have been fully considered and they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Stoepplemann’415 teaches away from the claimed invention for the distribution of fiber lengths of 50 micron or greater in the glass fibers because ‘415 mention that “Gentler processing of the inventive molding materials results in reinforced molded parts, wherein the fiber length distribution is significantly shifted to higher fiber length”, which is higher than glass fiber with a round cross-section. However, the examiner’s position is that this “higher fiber length”, which has the distribution of fiber lengths of 50 micron or greater in the glass fibers as expected (glass fiber being processed by the same screw rotation speed by extruder), is what the presently claimed molded article needed; and renders the article having desired low dimensional anisotropy shrinkage.
For the reasons set forth above and of record, the claims stand properly rejected.
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 RUIYUN ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7934. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00-5:00 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, Arron Austin can be reached on 571-272-8935. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RUIYUN ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782
