ETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the Applicant filing on 1.8.26. Claims 1-4, 21-25, 30 are pending and have been examined. Claims 5-20 stand canceled and claims 26-29 stand withdrawn.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1.8.26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments and Amendments
The Applicant has made amendments to the independent claim 1 and dependents 22-24 and added new independent claim 30 (combination of allowable subject matter of claim 24 with claim 1 and intervening claims 21-22 which will be examined below.
Previous claim objection related to claim 24 is withdrawn in light of amendment “of”.
Rejection of Claims 22-24 under 35 U.S.C 112(b) is withdrawn as Claim 22 in amended with new limitations “ferromagnetic functional groups attached to monomers”.
With respect to 35 U.S.C 102 and 103 rejections, the Applicant provides arguments to which the
Examiner will respond accordingly:
Applicant Argument 1: Claim 1 recites a "ferromagnetic polymer material." That term is defined in the specification in paragraph 0011, "The term "ferromagnetic polymer material" as used here includes both ferromagnetic polymers with ferromagnetic particles, and ferromagnetic polymers alone." In either case, the polymers are ferromagnetic with and without the particles…Applicant has amended claim 1 to clarify that the ferromagnetic polymers used are ferromagnetic polymers alone.
Examiner Response 1: Applicant has amended claim 1 by adding limitation “comprised of ferromagnetic polymers alone” which will be examined in below sections.
Claim Objections
Claims below are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 30 recites “with one or divinylbenzene or an acrylic monomer with a pendant epoxy group” wherein underlined should be corrected to “of”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 2-3 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitations “further comprising ferromagnetic particles” which conflict with claim 1 recitation “comprised of ferromagnetic polymers alone”.
Claim 3 is rejected due to its dependency on Claim 2.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 2 recites the limitations “further comprising ferromagnetic particles” which is not narrowing claim 1 recitation “comprised of ferromagnetic polymers alone”.
Claim 3 is rejected due to its dependency on Claim 2.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 (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 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, 21-23, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Aldissi (US7097757B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Aldissi discloses a shaped structure (Abstract discloses “The polymers are fabricated” which inherently must have a shape) comprising a ferromagnetic polymer material (Abstract discloses polymer having ferromagnetic properties) comprised of ferromagnetic polymers alone [e.g., Figs 13-14] aligned to a unified alignment direction [e.g., Col 3, 36-38 discloses “ordered structures” and Figs 4a,4b give example of “ordered structure”].
PNG
media_image1.png
542
398
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
532
628
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 21, Aldissi discloses the shaped structure as claimed in claim 1. Aldissi further discloses in which the shaped structure is formed by polymerizing ferromagnetic polymer precursors in the desired shape [Col 3, 40-43 discloses “In accordance with the present invention, a method and apparatus for producing polymers having uniquely ordered structures and properties is described. The polymers are fabricated by deposition from polymer solutions using an electrophoretic process and apparatus, or by direct polymerization from monomer solutions using electrochemical polymerization, with each process occurring within a magnetic field”].
Regarding Claim 22, Aldissi discloses the shaped structure as claimed in claim 21. Aldissi further discloses wherein polymerizing the ferromagnetic polymer precursors comprises polymerizing a precursor having ferromagnetic functional groups attached to monomers [Col 3, 40-43 discloses “In accordance with the present invention, a method and apparatus for producing polymers having uniquely ordered structures and properties is described. The polymers are fabricated by deposition from polymer solutions using an electrophoretic process and apparatus, or by direct polymerization from monomer solutions using electrochemical polymerization, with each process occurring within a magnetic field”].
Regarding Claim 23, Aldissi discloses the shaped structure as claimed in claim 22. Aldissi further discloses wherein polymerizing the ferromagnetic polymer precursor having the ferromagnetic functional groups attached to the monomers comprises one of radical polymerization [Aldissi , col 4, 49-50 discloses “electrochemical polymerization” and as per research by Examiner, in electrochemical polymerization, the process begins with the oxidation of the monomer, forming a cationic radical. If Applicant intends specifics in the polymerization process, they would need to be recited in the claims without adding new matter] polymerization with epoxide cross-linking, and anionic polymerization.
Regarding Claim 25, Aldissi discloses the shaped structure as claimed in claim 21. Tew further discloses in which polymerizing ferromagnetic polymer precursors in the desired shape comprises one of printing, extruding, and die casting [Col 2, 45-46 discloses “fabricated by deposition” which can be interpreted as printing. If Applicant intends specifics in the polymerization process, they would need to be recited in the claims without adding new matter].
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 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.
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.
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldissi in view of Tanaka (US5247054A).
Regarding Claim 4, Aldissi discloses the shaped structure as claimed in claim 1. Aldissi does not explicitly disclose wherein the shaped structure comprises at least part of a core of one of a stator, a rotor, motor, or transformer.
Tanaka discloses the shaped structure comprises at least part of a core of one of a stator, a rotor, motor, or transformer [Col 1, 60-65 discloses “magnets” which are well known in the art for usage in electric machines such as motors].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed ferromagnetic polymer of Aldissi with use in electric devices such as motors as taught by Tanaka in order to have magnetic parts with desired magnetism as is required by electric devices using motors.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 24 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 30 is objected to as per Claim Objection section above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 24 recites “The shaped structure of claim 22, wherein polymerizing the ferromagnetic polymer precursor having the ferromagnetic functional groups attached to the monomers comprises polymerizing TEMPO-methacrylate with one of divinylbenzene or an acrylic monomer with a pendant epoxy group”. Aldissi does not explicitly and specifically disclose polymerizing TEMPO-methacrylate with one of divinylbenzene or an acrylic monomer with a pendant epoxy group. In Aldissi, there is reference to PMA (polymethylacrylate) but the specifics of above recitation are not disclosed. Therefore claim 24 is allowable.
Claim 30 is a combination of previously allowable claim 24 with claim 1 and intervening claims 21,22 (see Remarks) and is allowable upon overcoming claim 30 objection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISWANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at 5712723560. 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.
/VISWANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2834