DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicants’ election without traverse of claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 13-MAY-2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 14-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 13-MAY-2026.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kihara et al. (US 2019/0351623 A1).
Regarding claims 1-4: Kihara et al. teaches the basic claimed resin composition for laser welding, comprising: a polybutylene terephthalate resin (paras. 79-82); bismuth pigments as laser absorbents (para. 60); and 0.01 to 5 parts by mass of a coloring agent (para. 125) wherein the coloring agent is a combination of non-black dyes (para. 103-106).
Kihara et al. does not directly teach the amount of bismuth pigments. However, Kihara et al. does suggest that amount of laser absorbent is between 0.01 and 0.3% mass (para. 57) and explains why being above or below these limits of laser absorbent is not beneficial to laser welding. As such one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to keep the total amount of all laser absorbents, including when bismuth pigments are included, in Kihara et al. to facilitate optimal or effective laser welding.
Regarding claim 5: Kihara et al. further teaches polybutylene terephthalate may be a copolymer of polyalkylene glycol such as isophthalic acid wherein the content of terephthalic acid in content of 95% by mass or more (para. 93). As such, this allows for up to 5% isophthalic acid.
Regarding claim 6: Kihara et al. further teaches a polycarbonate resin (paras. 22, 79-82).
Regarding claim 7: Kihara et al. further teaches a laser-weakly-absorptive resin member, or in other words a laser-transmitting resin member (paras. 43 and 57).
Regarding claim 8: As stated above, Kihara et al. teaches 0.01 to 5 parts by mass of a coloring agent (para. 125) wherein the coloring agent is a combination of non-black dyes (para. 103-106) and laser absorbent is between 0.01 and 0.3% mass (para. 57). As such, ratios of dye to bismuth pigments are about 1: 0.03 to 16 are rendered obvious in view of the bismuth pigment being added along with absorbent nigrosine sulfate.
Regarding claim 9: Kihara et al. further teaches adjusting absorbance of a resin member to transmit a laser beam and another resin member to absorb the laser beam (para. 16). For a laser-weakly-absorptive resin member the absorbance is between 0.09 and 0.9 (paras. 17 and 44). This laser-weakly-absorptive resin member may also include non-green colorants (para. 103-104). It is submitted that colorants absorb wavelengths not of their associated color and reflect wavelengths of their associated color. Green in the visible spectrum is about 500 nm and therefore non-green colorants would tend absorb this wavelength.
Regarding claim 13: Kihara et al. further teaches glass fibers having a diameter, thereby indicating that the fibers are substantially circular in cross section. (para. 128).
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kihara et al. (US 2019/0351623 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamanaka et al. (US 2019/0016883 A1).
Regarding claims 10-12: Kihara et al. teaches the basic claimed resin composition as set forth above regarding claim 1. Kihara et al. also teaches use of an impact modifier such as a polyester elastomer comprising a polyester block copolymer (para. 147-148) but does not teach an elastomer from novolac-type epoxy compounds. Nonetheless, Yamanaka et al. teaches epoxy group-containing copolymeric elastomer, preferably, novolac-type epoxy compounds (paras. 144, 150 and 158). Kihara et al. and Yamanaka et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely, resin compositions for laser welding. At the time of filing, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have substituted the impact modifier comprising novolac-type epoxy compounds as taught by Yamanaka et al., the impact modifier of Kihara et al., because Yamanaka et al. suggest such impact modifiers exhibit a good reactivity with polybutylene terephthalate and causes little reduction in the laser transmittance (para.150) as well as improve weldability (para. 156).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK EASHOO whose telephone number is (571)272-1197. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7am - 4pm.
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, Patricia Mallari, can be reached at (571)272-4729. 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.
MARK EASHOO, Ph.D.
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1767
/MARK EASHOO/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1767
Prosecution Insights