Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/544,082

FIBER STRUCTURE, CROSSLINKED MOLDED BODY, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING CROSSLINKED MOLDED BODY

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Dec 18, 2023
Examiner
IMANI, ELIZABETH MARY COLE
Art Unit
1789
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kuraray Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
33%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 7m
To Grant
58%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 33% of cases
33%
Career Allow Rate
311 granted / 930 resolved
-31.6% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 7m
Avg Prosecution
77 currently pending
Career history
1007
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
73.5%
+33.5% vs TC avg
§102
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§112
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 930 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 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. 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 1-19 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. The use of the term “epoxy-type” in claims 1, 3, 18, 19 and “polycarbonate-type” in claims 7, 19 renders the scope of the claims indefinite. It is not clear what is meant by the inclusion of the word “type” or how an epoxy-type or polycarbonate-type resin differs from an epoxy resin or polycarbonate resin. The scope of the claims is not clear. 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. Claim(s) 1-19 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hale, U.S. Patent No. 3,480,695 in view of Takahashi, WO 202/196617, (equivalent to U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 022/0185977 which is relied on for citations). Hale discloses a composition comprising thermoplastic epoxy resin, (thermoplastic polyhydroxyether) and thermoplastic polycarbonate. See col. 1, lines 10-64. The composition can be combined and formed by molding processes including compression, injection, calendaring and extrusion. See col. 5, lines 4-10. The composition can be formed into fibers and filaments. See col. 6, lines 30-35. The composition can be incorporated into nonwoven fabrics as bonding fibers with other types of fibers to facilitate bonding. See col. 6, lines 39 – col. 7, line 2, and col. 7, lines 55-62. Note that a thermoplastic epoxy resin would be amorphous. The thermoplastic epoxy can have a Tg of 95C. See col. 1, line 35. The composition can include 70 parts thermoplastic epoxy and 30 parts polycarbonate. See example 1. Since the composition of the epoxy and the polycarbonate can be formed into fibers, they would have a fiber shape. The composition can have an elongation of 35-60%. See example 1. With regard to the diameter of the reinforcing fibers relative to the fibers of the claimed composition, it would have been obvious to have selected fibers having a fairly uniform diameter if a fabric having a smooth hand was desired or to have selected the relative diameters of the bonding and the reinforcing fibers in order to provide a fabric having the desired smoothness, hand and strength. With regard to the limitation of claim 1 that the polycarbonate and epoxy are crosslinkable with each other, since the same materials are used which are made the same way using the same components, it is reasonable to expect that the polycarbonate and epoxy of Hale would have the property of being crosslinkable with each other, as well as the claimed birefringence, since birefringence is a property of the resin. However, if the property of being crosslinkable is not necessarily present and because Hale does not distinctly disclose a crosslinked structure, Takahashi discloses a resin composition comprising a thermoplastic epoxy resin and a polycarbonate resin which can be thermally crosslinked. See abstract. Takahashi further discloses that the polycarbonate resin should have a glass transition temperature of more than 40 degrees C higher than the epoxy resin. See paragraph 0075. Takahashi teaches forming structures by molding at temperatures as claimed. See examples and paragraph 0172. With regard to a cooling step, one of ordinary skill would necessarily recognize that after heat molding a cooling step would be required. Takahashi teaches providing the epoxy/polycarbonate composition as a bonding agent for nonwoven fabrics so that that the amount of the composition is 20-50%. See paragraph 0112. Therefore, it would have been obvious to have provided the particular crosslinkable epoxy and polycarbonate of Takahashi in order to provide a crosslinkable composition, in order to form a composition with crosslinked bonds. It further would have been obvious to have selected the relative amounts of the composition relative to the other fibers as well as to have provided the polycarbonate with a higher Tg, in view of the teaching of Takahashi that employing polycarbonate having the higher and the relative amounts of fibers were known in the art to be suitable for use in forming the epoxy/polycarbonate bonding composition and suitably bonded nonwovens. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Miller et al, U.S. Patent No. 3,234,313 discloses compositions which can include a thermoplastic epoxy and a thermoplastic polycarbonate but does not disclose forming the composition into fibers or crosslinking the composition. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M IMANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Wednesday 7AM-7:30; Thursday 10AM -2 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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. /ELIZABETH M IMANI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582896
SHIN GUARD MADE OF AUXETIC MATERIAL AND UNIT STRUCTURE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12559650
ADHESIVE ARTICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12546083
Heavy Duty Silt Fence Using Nonwoven Silt Retention Fabric
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12540435
FABRIC FOR A FIBER WEB PRODUCING MACHINE AND A METHOD FOR MAKING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12532943
Fiber-Bound Engineered Materials Formed as a Synthetic Leather
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
33%
Grant Probability
58%
With Interview (+25.1%)
4y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 930 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month