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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 12, 13, 14, and 15 recites the limitation "The colored sealing materials". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Analysis
Summary of Claim 1:
A fluorine-containing elastomer composition comprising
0.4 to 4.0 parts by weight of a pigment that is a perylene-based compound, a naphthalenecarboxamide- based compound, a pyrimidinetrione-based compound, or a benzimidazolone-based compound, and
0.2 to 5.0 parts by weight of a bisamidoxime compound or 2,2-bis(3-amino-4- hydroxyphenyl)hexafluoropropane,
based on 100 parts by weight of a fluorine-containing elastomer having a copolymer composition of (A) 60.0 to 80.0 mol% of tetrafluoroethylene, (B) 19.8 to 39.8 mol% of perfluoro(lower alkyl vinyl ether) or perfluoro(lower alkoxy lower alkyl vinyl ether), and (C) 0.2 to 5.0 mol% of a perfluoro unsaturated nitrile compound.
Claim Interpretation
The limitation “lower alkoxy” and “lower alkyl” is interpreted as an alkoxy or alkyl group having 1-5 carbon atoms [0015].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumino et al. (US 20170283585 as listed on IDS dated February 2, 2026).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Sumino et al. disclose in Example 5 a fluorine-containing elastomer composition comprising 1 parts by mass of compound 3 that is 3,4,9,10,perylene tetracarboxylic acid diimide and a 100 parts by mass of a fluoroelastomer containing tetrafluoroethylene (TFE), perfluoromethyl vinyl ether (PMVE), and CNVE CF2═CFOCF2CF(CF3)OCF2CF2CN having a ratio of 59.5/30.5/1.0 mol% = (TFE/PMVE/CNVE), thereby reading on a pigment that is a perylene-based compound and lying within the claimed ranges of the pigment and the fluorine-containing elastomer, the amounts of perfluoro(lower alkyl vinyl ether) and perfluoro unsaturated nitrile compound of instant claim 1 (Table 3).
The fluorine containing elastomer comprises 59.5 mol% of tetrafluoroethylene, thereby lying outside the claimed range of instant claim 1 and 2.
However, Sumino et al. broadly teaches the amount of tetrafluoroethylene is 45 to 89.9 mol% [0046], thereby overlapping with the claimed range of instant claim 1 and 2. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the range taught by Sumino et al.
Sumino et al. do not disclose Example 5 comprises a crosslinker.
However, Sumino et al. broadly teaches the fluoroelastomer composition may comprise a crosslinker such as 2,2-bis(3-amino-4-hydroxyphenyl)hexafluoropropane and comprises 0.05 to 10 parts by mass of a crosslinker relative to 100 parts by mass of the fluoroelastomer [0083-0097], thereby reading on 2,2-bis(3-amino-4-hydroxyphenyl)hexafluoropropane and lying with the claimed range. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add a crosslinker to the fluorine containing elastomer composition as taught by Sumino et al.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Sumino et al. disclose the pigment of Example 5 is 3,4,9,10,perylene tetracarboxylic acid diimide, thereby reading on the perylene based compound having an imide group of instant claim 3 and the structure of instant claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, 6, and 7, as discussed above, Sumino et al. disclose the pigment is a perylene based compound. Claims 5, 6, and 7 do not limit the pigment to the compounds recited in claims 5, 6, and 7. That is, because claims 5, 6, and 7 also include the limitations of claim 3 (from which claims 5, 6, and 7 depend), claims 5, 6, and 7 also include the limitation that the pigment is a perylene based compound. Because Sumino et al. teaches such a pigment, claims 5, 6, and 7 are rendered obvious by Sumino et al.
Regarding claim 8, Sumino et al. teaches crosslinkers may be added as rejected above. Furthermore, Sumino et al. broadly teaches crosslinkers such as bisamidoxime having the formula show below
PNG
media_image1.png
98
384
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wherein n is an integer of 1 to 10, thereby reading on the general formula of the instant claim. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the add to add the crosslinker in the amounts as taught by Sumino et al.
Regarding claim 9, 11, 12, and 13, Sumino et al. is silent on if the composition of Example 5 is used to form a vulcanized molded article.
However, Sumino et al. broadly teach the fluorine containing composition can be crosslinked and can be used to form a sealant for semiconductor manufacturing materials [0102-0112], thereby reading on the colored vulcanized article of instant claim 9, the sealing material of instant claim 11. Furthermore, Sumino et al. broadly teaches the molded article formed can be suitably used in semiconductor manufacturing devices where high-density plasma irradiation is performed [0111], thereby reading on plasma irradiation applications of instant claim 12 and semiconductor production equipment of instant claim 13.
The examiner interprets “used for sealing materials” in instant claim 11, “used for plasma irradiation applications” in instant claim 12, “used for semiconductor equipment” in instant claim 13, “used for surface sealing for silicon treatment processing chambers” in instant claim 14, and “used for gate valves” in instant claim 15 as reciting the purpose or intended use of the claimed colored sealing materials. If the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. (MPEP 2111.02(11) (citing Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161,1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999) and Rowe v. Dror, 112 F.3d 473, 478, 42 USPQ2d 1550, 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ("where a patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention, the preamble is not a claim limitation")).)
Regarding claim 10, Sumino et al. is silent on the compression set and rubber hardness of the colored vulcanized molded article as recited in the instant claim. In view of the substantially identical colored vulcanized molded article of Sumino et al. as rejected in claim 9, the colored vulcanized molded article of Sumino et al., will possess the claimed properties because compression set and rubber hardness are inherent properties. Because the PTO does not have proper means to conduct experiments, the burden of proof is now shifted to Applicant to show otherwise. (See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977); In re Fitzgerald, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980).)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREA WU whose telephone number is (571)272-0342. The examiner can normally be reached M F 8 - 5.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at (571) 272-1130. 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.
/ANDREA WU/Examiner, Art Unit 1763 /JOSEPH S DEL SOLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights