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 .
The Office Action is in response to the application filed January 04, 2024.
Claim Analysis
Summary of Claim 1:
A method of forming an article of manufacture, comprising:
cutting a used textile into pieces;
combining a piece of the used textile with a resin in a mold; and
curing the resin to form the article.
Claim Objections
Claims 4-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 recites “impregnating the piece with the resin before placing the piece in the mold”. For consistency, Applicant is advised to consider rephrasing to “impregnating the piece of the used textile with the resin before placing the piece of the used textile with the resin in the mold” (emphasis added). Similarly, Claim 5 recites “placing the piece in the mold”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-6, 9, 11, 13-14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Zou et al. (CN 109267234A; cited in the IDS submitted on 02/07/2025; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Zou”).
Regarding Claim 1, Zou teaches a method for recycling used clothing [Claim 1; Example 1], corresponding to the method of forming an article of manufacture of Claim 1, comprising:
Waste clothing [Claim 1; Example 1], corresponding to the used textile of Claim 1;
Cutting the waste clothing raw materials [Claim 1; Example 1], corresponding to cutting a used textile into pieces of Claim 1;
Mixing the waste clothing raw materials with an adhesive, such as a thermosetting resin, and performing injection molding or casting molding on the resulting mixture [Claims 1, 4, 10; Example 1], corresponding to combining a piece of the used textile with a resin in a mold of Claim 1;
Curing the resulting mixture to obtain a molding material [Claim 1; Example 1], corresponding to curing the resin to form the article of Claim 1.
Regarding Claims 3-6, 9, 11, 13-14 and 17, Zou further teaches:
Washing and drying before cutting the waste clothing [¶ 0062; Example 1], corresponding to washing and drying the used textile before cutting the used textile of Claims 3 and 11;
Layering the waste clothing sheets impregnated with the adhesive, stacking them together, and then cured in a mold to obtain a molded material [¶ 0045; Claim 13; Example 1], corresponding to impregnating the piece with the resin before placing the piece in the mold of Claim 4, and combining a second piece of a textile in the mold with the piece of used textile and the resin, such that the piece of the used textile and the second piece are layered of Claim 14;
Placing waste clothing into a container filled with resin, and then adding more resin to the container to fill the gaps to ensure the resin saturates the waste clothing [¶ 0062; Example 1], corresponding to wherein combining the piece of the used textile with the resin in the mold includes placing the resin in the mold, then placing the piece in the mold, and then placing more resin in the mold of Claim 5;
Wherein the adhesive is a thermosetting resin [Claim 4], thereby reading on wherein the resin is a thermosetting polymer of Claim 6;
Separating the heterogenous parts from the waste clothing [Claim 1], corresponding to obtaining mixed used textiles including the used textile, and sorting the mixed used textiles of Claim 9;
Wherein the curing process is carried out under heating conditions [Claim 6], corresponding to heating the piece of the used textile with the resin in the mold of Claim 13; and
Wherein the waste clothing and adhesive product is used to produce household goods [Claim 9], corresponding to a composite of a piece of a used textile within a cured resin of Claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zou et al. (CN 109267234A; cited in the IDS submitted on 02/07/2025; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Zou”) in view of Marple et al. (EP 1484148 B1; as cited in the IDS submitted on 02/28/2025; hereafter as “Marple”).
Zou teaches the method of manufacture, used textile, resin, mold, and curing of Claim 1 as set forth above and incorporated herein by reference.
Zou further teaches the use of molds [Claim 1] and UV-curing adhesives [¶ 0048].
However, Zou does not explicitly teach wherein the mold comprises a UV transparent material and curing the resin includes exposing the resin to UV radiation through the mold of Claim 2.
Nevertheless, Marple teaches UV curable resin molding method [Abstract], wherein cloth may be incorporated in the UV curable resin [¶ 0019]. Marple further teaches the UV curable material is exposed to the UV light source through UV transparent portions of the mold [¶ 0011], corresponding to wherein the mold comprises a UV transparent material and curing the resin includes exposing the resin to UV radiation through the mold of Claim 2. Marple offers the motivation that the curing UV light may be directed at the UV curable material through the UV transparent portions of the mold [¶ 0011].
Zou and Marple are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of manufacturing comprising UV-curable resin embedded with textiles.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the UV transparent mold of Marple with the method of Zou, with the motivation to produce a UV curing the UV curable material, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Claims 7-8 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zou et al. (CN 109267234A; cited in the IDS submitted on 02/07/2025; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Zou”) in view of Clement et al. (WO 2020/095196 A1; hereafter as “Clement”).
Zou teaches the method of manufacture, used textile, resin, mold, and curing of Claim 1 as set forth above and incorporated herein by reference.
Zou further teaches the use of thermosetting adhesives [¶ 0048] and curing agents [¶ 0062].
However, Zou does not explicitly teach the photoinitiator of Claim 7, the thermal initiator of Claim 8, wherein the second piece is of a textile that is not a used textile of Claim 15, and wherein the second piece is of a glass, carbon fiber, or synthetic fiber textile of Claim 16.
Nevertheless, Clement teaches coated panel comprising a thermally cured polyester resin [Page 3, Lines 1-7], a textile layer [Page 29, Lines 29-32], and initiators such as a photoinitiator [Page 6, Lines 1-3] and a thermoinitiator [Page 5, Lines 26-28], wherein the photoinitiator corresponds with the photoinitiator of Claim 7, and the thermoinitiator corresponds with the thermal initiator of Claim 8. Clement is silent to the textile layer comprising used textiles, so for the purposes of examination, will be interpreted to correspond to wherein the second piece is of a textile that is not a used textile of Claim 15. Clement further teaches the textile may further comprise glass fibers [Page 30, Lines 1-4], corresponding to wherein the second piece is of a glass, carbon fiber, or synthetic fiber textile of Claim 16.
Clement offers the motivation that thermoinitiators in the presence of polyester resins can play an important role in the quality and relief aspects of the obtained wear layer [Page 5, Lines 26-28]. Clement also offers the motivation that by varying the concentration of the thermal initiators and/or photoinitiators, the degree of polymerization and the type of polymerization can be controlled [Page 9, Linea 5-8]. Clement also offers the motivation that an extremely thin but stable panel can be obtained by using a textile layer comprising glass fibers [Page 30, Lines 1-8].
Zou and Clement are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of manufacturing articles comprising UV-curable resin, textiles, and curing agents.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the initiators and glass fibers of Clement with the method of Zou, with the motivation to control polymerization while producing an thin but stable product, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zou et al. (CN 109267234A; cited in the IDS submitted on 02/07/2025; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Zou”) in view of Yano et al. (WO 2016129693 A1; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Yano”).
Zou teaches the method of manufacture, used textile, resin, mold, and curing of Claim 1 as set forth above and incorporated herein by reference.
However, Zou does not explicitly teach measuring the UV transmissivity of the used textile of Claim 10.
Nevertheless, Yano teaches a resin composition reinforced with nanofibers obtained from cloth wherein the resin composition can be cured with ultraviolet light to produce a molded product [¶ 0039-0041, 0181]. Yano further teaches using a UV-Vis spectrometer to measure the transmittance of the resin sheets impregnated with the nanofibers [¶ 0227, 0242-0244], corresponding to measuring the UV transmissivity of the used textile of Claim 10.
Yano offers the motivation that measuring the light transmittance allows comparison of composition transparency before and after processing steps [¶ 0240-0241].
Zou and Yano are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of manufacturing molded articles comprising curable resin, and textiles.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the method of measuring transmission with the method of Zou, with the motivation to compare composition transparency, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Claims 12, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zou et al. (CN 109267234A; cited in the IDS submitted on 02/07/2025; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Zou”) in view of Bazzana et al. (US 2019/0264027 A1; hereafter as “Bazzana”).
Zou teaches the method of manufacture, used textile, resin, mold, and curing of Claim 1 as set forth above and incorporated herein by reference.
Nevertheless, Bazzana teaches a method of manufacturing a filled polymeric resin material [Claim 15], wherein:
the textile fibers may be sewn together before molding [¶ 0043, 0155], stitching the piece of the used textile before combining the piece of the used textile with the resin in the mold of Claim 12;
textile fibers comprised of glass fibers, carbon fiber, or synthetic fibers [¶ 0148], thereby reading on wherein the second piece of textile is of a glass, carbon fiber, or synthetic fiber textile of Claim 16;
Regarding Claim 15, Banzanna is silent to the textile fibers being used, so for the purposes of examination, will be interpreted to read on wherein the second piece of a textile that is not a used textile of Claim 15.
Bazzana offers the motivation that sewing is suitable for use in the production of textiles [¶ 0155]. Bazzana also offers the motivation that different fibers may have a variety of cross-sectional shapes that can effect its properties, such as its softness, luster and wicking ability [¶ 0150].
Zou and Bazzana are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of manufacturing articles comprising curable resin, textiles, and initiators.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the sewing step and textile fibers of Bazzana with the method of Zou, with the motivation to control product properties, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6, 9, and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazzana et al. (US 2019/0264027 A1; hereafter as “Bazzana”).
Regarding Claims 1 and 17, Bazzana teaches a method of manufacturing a filled polymeric resin material [Claim 15], corresponding to a method of forming an article of manufacture of Claim 1, and an article of manufacture of Claim 17, comprising:
waste or scrap textile fibers such as ground post-consumer waste footwear [Abstract; Claim 2], corresponding to cutting a used textile into pieces of Claim 1;
wherein the waste or scrap material is encapsulated by a polymeric resin material [Claims 1, 3], corresponding to combining a piece of the used textile with a resin of Claim 1;
wherein the polymeric resin material is molded [¶ 0043], corresponding to the mold of Claim 1; and
curing the polymeric resin material [Claim 20], corresponding to curing the resin to form the article of Claim 1.
However, Bazzana does to teach all the claimed elements of Claim 1 in one embodiment.
Nevertheless, Banzzana teaches a method of manufacturing, used textiles, cured resin, and mold with sufficient specificity that one of ordinary skill in the art would arrive at the claimed combination. Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention would have found it “obvious to try” the method of manufacturing, used textiles, cured resin, and mold as the teaching represents a finite number of identified, predictable combinations. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Regarding Claims 6, 9, 12-14, and 16, Bazzana further teaches:
wherein the polymeric resin material is a thermoplastic material [¶ 0043], thereby reading on the thermoplastic polymer of Claim 6;
the footwear upper may be separated from the midsole and outsole prior to grinding [¶ 0170; Example 3], which corresponds with obtaining mixed used textiles including the used textile, and sorting the mixed used textiles of Claim 9;
the textile fibers may be sewn together before molding [¶ 0043, 0155], stitching the piece of the used textile before combining the piece of the used textile with the resin in the mold of Claim 12;
the thermoplastic resin softens when heated before it is molded [¶ 0043], corresponding to heating the piece of used textile with the resin in the mold of Claim 13;
the textile layers can be attached using the polymeric resin [¶ 0140, 0164], which corresponds with combining a second piece of a textile in the mold with the piece of used textile and the resin, such that the piece of the used textile and the second piece are layered of Claim 14; and
textile fibers further comprising glass fibers, carbon fiber, or synthetic fibers [¶ 0148], thereby reading on wherein the second piece of textile is of a glass, carbon fiber, or synthetic fiber textile of Claim 16.
Regarding Claim 15, Banzanna is silent to the glass fibers, carbon fiber, and synthetic fibers being from waste material, so for the purposes of examination, will be interpreted to read on wherein the second piece of a textile that is not a used textile of Claim 15.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazzana et al. (US 2019/0264027 A1; hereafter as “Bazzana”) in view of Marple et al. (EP 1484148 B1; as cited in the IDS submitted on 02/28/2025; hereafter as “Marple”).
Bazzana teaches the method of manufacture, used textile, resin, mold, and curing of Claim 1 as set forth above and incorporated herein by reference.
However, Bazzana does not explicitly teach wherein the mold comprises a UV transparent material and curing the resin includes exposing the resin to UV radiation through the mold of Claim 2.
Nevertheless, Marple teaches UV curable resin molding method [Abstract], wherein cloth may be incorporated in the UV curable resin [¶ 0019]. Marple further teaches the UV curable material is exposed to the UV light source through UV transparent portions of the mold [¶ 0011], corresponding to wherein the mold comprises a UV transparent material and curing the resin includes exposing the resin to UV radiation through the mold of Claim 2. Marple offers the motivation that the curing UV light may be directed at the UV curable material through the UV transparent portions of the mold [¶ 0011].
Bazzana and Marple are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of manufacturing articles comprising curable resin embedded with textiles.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the UV curable resin and UV transparent mold of Marple with the method of Bazzana, with the motivation to produce a UV curing the UV curable material, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Claims 3-5, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazzana et al. (US 2019/0264027 A1; hereafter as “Bazzana”) in view of Zou et al. (CN 109267234A; cited in the IDS submitted on 02/07/2025; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Zou”).
Bazzana teaches the method of manufacture, used textile, resin, mold, and curing of Claim 1 as set forth above and incorporated herein by reference.
However, Bazzana does not teach the washing and drying the used textile before cutting the used textile of Claims 3 and 11, wherein combining the piece of the used textile with the resin in the mold includes impregnating the piece with the resin before placing the piece in the mold of Claim 4, and wherein combining the piece of the used textile with the resin in the mold includes placing the resin in the mold, then placing the piece in the mold, and then placing more resin in the mold of Claim 5.
Nevertheless, Zou teaches a method for recycling used clothing, comprising molding waste clothing and a thermosetting resin [Claims 1, 4, 10; Example 1], and further comprising:
Washing and drying before cutting the waste clothing [¶ 0062; Example 1], corresponding to washing and drying the used textile before cutting the used textile of Claims 3 and 11;
Curing in a mold waste clothing sheets impregnated with the adhesive to obtain a molded material [¶ 0045; Claim 13; Example 1], corresponding to impregnating the piece with the resin before placing the piece in the mold of Claim 4;
Placing waste clothing into a container filled with resin, and then adding more resin to the container to fill the gaps to ensure the resin saturates the waste clothing [¶ 0062; Example 1], corresponding to wherein combining the piece of the used textile with the resin in the mold includes placing the resin in the mold, then placing the piece in the mold, and then placing more resin in the mold of Claim 5.
Zou offers the motivation that the step of washing allows the waste clothing to be disinfected prior to further treatment [¶ 0040]. Zou also offers the motivation that impregnating and saturating the waste clothing sheets with epoxy resin produces a cured hard product suitable for machining [¶ 0062].
Bazzana and Zou are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of manufacturing articles comprising curable resin, textiles, and initiators.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the washing and impregnating steps of Zou with the method of Bazzana, with the motivation to disinfect and machine the final product, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazzana et al. (US 2019/0264027 A1; hereafter as “Bazzana”) in view of Clement et al. (WO 2020/095196 A1; hereafter as “Clement”).
Bazzana teaches the method of manufacture, used textile, resin, mold, and curing of Claim 1 as set forth above and incorporated herein by reference.
Bazzana further teaches the use of initiators [¶ 0138].
However, Bazzana does not explicitly teach the photoinitiator of Claim 7, and the thermal initiator of Claim 8.
Nevertheless, Clement teaches a coated panel comprising a thermally cured polyester resin [Page 3, Lines 1-7], a textile layer [Page 29, Lines 29-32], and initiators such as a photoinitiator [Page 6, Lines 1-3] and a thermoinitiator [Page 5, Lines 26-28], wherein the photoinitiator corresponds with the photoinitiator of Claim 7, and the thermoinitiator corresponds with the thermal initiator of Claim 8.
Clement offers the motivation that thermoinitiators in the presence of polyester resins can play an important role in the quality and relief aspects of the obtained wear layer [Page 5, Lines 26-28]. Clement also offers the motivation that by varying the concentration of the thermal initiators and/or photoinitiators, the degree of polymerization and the type of polymerization can be controlled [Page 9, Linea 5-8].
Bazzana and Clement are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of manufacturing articles comprising curable resin, textiles, glass fibers, and initiators.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the initiators of Clement with the method of Bazzana, with the motivation to control polymerization, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazzana et al. (US 2019/0264027 A1; hereafter as “Bazzana”) in view of Yano et al. (WO 2016129693 A1; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Yano”).
Bazzana teaches the method of manufacture, used textile, resin, mold, and curing of Claim 1 as set forth above and incorporated herein by reference.
However, Bazzana does not explicitly teach measuring the UV transmissivity of the used textile of Claim 10.
Nevertheless, Yano teaches a resin composition reinforced with nanofibers obtained from cloth wherein the resin composition can be cured with ultraviolet light to produce a molded product [¶ 0039-0041, 0181]. Yano further teaches using a UV-Vis spectrometer to measure the transmittance of the resin sheets impregnated with the nanofibers [¶ 0227, 0242-0244], corresponding to measuring the UV transmissivity of the used textile of Claim 10.
Yano offers the motivation that measuring the light transmittance allows comparison of composition transparency before and after processing steps [¶ 0240-0241].
Bazzana and Yano are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of manufacturing molded articles comprising curable resin, and textiles.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the method of measuring transmission of Yano with the method of Bazzana, with the motivation to compare composition transparency, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sadhu et al. (WO 1997/000736A1) teaches a method of manufacturing a shoe comprising coating a footwear upper with an ultra-violet curable resin to cure to a thermoset state [Claim 1], comprising photoinitiators [Claim 13; Example 1; Page 8, Lines4-5] and synthetic footwear upper materials [Page 6, Lines 27-31].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DORIS LING whose telephone number is (571)270-3961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-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, ARRIE LANEE REUTHER can be reached on (571)270-7026. 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.
/DORIS LING/Examiner, Art Unit 1764
/ARRIE L REUTHER/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Prosecution Insights