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 25-30 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 25 depends upon itself. Please amend claim 25 to depend upon a different claim.
Claims 26-30 are rejected as inheriting the defect(s) of claim 25.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 16-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu (US 2020/0238565).
Regarding claim 1, Hu discloses a friction body (300) for discoloring thermochromic handwriting written with a thermochromic ink with frictional heat (a block of the delignified wood of Hu is capable of creating friction), wherein the friction body comprises a surface plane (top surface of 300 in Fig. 3A) configured to generate frictional heat when manually rubbed on a porous substrate (the delignified wood is inherently capable of generating frictional heat when rubbed on a surface), and wherein the friction body comprises a first thermal conductivity in a first direction (L direction in Fig. 3A) substantially parallel to the surface plane which is greater than a second thermal conductivity in a second direction (R direction in Fig. 3A) which is substantially perpendicular to the surface plane (¶0125). It is noted that the limitation “friction body” is interpreted broadly as “a body capable of generating friction”.
Regarding claim 16, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the porous substrate is a paper substrate (the wood of Hu is capable of generating friction when rubbed on paper).
Regarding claim 17, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the first thermal conductivity is at least about 1.5 times greater than the second thermal conductivity (Table 2 shows an axial thermal conductivity of 0.06 W/m
∙
K and a transverse thermal conductivity of 0.032 W/m
∙
K, which means that the first thermal conductivity is 1.875 times greater than the second thermal conductivity).
Regarding claim 18, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the first thermal conductivity is at least 1.8 times greater than the second thermal conductivity (Table 2 shows an axial thermal conductivity of 0.06 W/m
∙
K and a transverse thermal conductivity of 0.032 W/m
∙
K, which means that the first thermal conductivity is 1.875 times greater than the second thermal conductivity).
Regarding claim 19, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the second thermal conductivity is less than about 0.30 W/m
∙
K (0.032 W/m
∙
K, see Table 2).
Regarding claim 20, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the second thermal conductivity is less than about 0.15 W/m
∙
K (0.032 W/m
∙
K, see Table 2).
Regarding claim 21, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the second thermal conductivity is less than about 0.05 W/(m -K) (0.032 W/m
∙
K, see Table 2).
Regarding claim 22, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein a third thermal conductivity in a third direction (T in Fig. 3A) which is substantially perpendicular to the first direction and parallel to the surface plane is substantially the same as the second thermal conductivity.
Regarding claim 23, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the friction body comprises a multiplicity of longitudinal structures (202) which are arranged substantially parallel to each other, wherein each of the longitudinal structures has a thermal conductivity which is greater in a longitudinal direction than in a transversal direction (Table 2).
Regarding claim 24, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the friction body comprises a multiplicity of tubular lumina (202) which are arranged substantially parallel to each other (Fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 25 as best understood, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 25, wherein the tubular lumina are filled with gas (the tubular Lumina of Hu are hollow and therefore filled with air).
Regarding claim 26 as best understood, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 25, wherein the tubular lumina comprise cellulose (¶0003).
Regarding claim 27 as best understood, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 25, wherein the tubular lumina have an inner diameter of between about 50 µm and about 500 µm (¶0131).
Regarding claim 28 as best understood, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 25, wherein the tubular lumina have a wall thickness of between about 10 µm and about 100 µm (¶0131).
Regarding claim 29 as best understood, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 25, wherein the tubular lumina comprise walls comprise nano-sized tubular structures (¶0131).
Regarding claim 30 as best understood, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 25, wherein the tubular lumina are formed by a piece of natural wood that has been chemically treated to remove at least a part of the lignin from the natural wood while substantially preserving the structure of cellulose-based tubular lumina of the natural wood (¶0077-0080).
Regarding claim 31, Hu discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein surface plane is configured to heat to a surface temperature of between about 40°C to about 80 °C when pressed onto a 45 g/m2 paper made of 100% chemical pulp and having a brightness of about 83% with a load of about 500 g per about 3 mm2 to about 8 mm2 contact area and pulled across the paper with a constant pull rate of about 10 to about 200 mm/min (Hu discloses a friction body of the same material as the claimed invention, and is therefore assumed to perform the same as the claimed invention).
Regarding claim 32, Hu discloses the friction body of claim 1, wherein the friction body comprises a plant-based material having a density of less than about 0.30 g/cm3 (Table 1).
Regarding claim 33, Hu discloses the friction body of claim 1, wherein the friction body comprises a plant-based material having a density of less than about 0.25 g/cm3 (Table 1).
Claim(s) 1, 16-21, and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wase (US 9592702)
Regarding claim 1 in the alternative, Wase discloses a friction body (7) for discoloring thermochromic handwriting written with a thermochromic ink with frictional heat (col. 1, ll. 6-10), wherein the friction body comprises a surface plane (end surface of 7 in Fig. 3) configured to generate frictional heat when manually rubbed on a porous substrate (col. 1, line 66 to col. 2, line 4), and wherein the friction body comprises a first thermal conductivity in a first direction (0.05-20 W/m
∙
K col. 2, ll. 33-41) substantially parallel to the surface plane which is greater than a second thermal conductivity in a second direction (0.02587 W/m
∙
K through the air in the center of the friction body) which is substantially perpendicular to the surface plane.
Regarding claim 16 in the alternative, Wase discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the porous substrate is a paper substrate (col. 1, line 66 to col. 2, line 4).
Regarding claim 17 in the alternative, Wase discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the first thermal conductivity is at least about 1.5 times greater than the second thermal conductivity (the friction body material has a thermal conductivity of 0.05-20 W/m
∙
K, compared with the thermal conductivity of air of 0.02587 W/m
∙
K).
Regarding claim 18 in the alternative, Wase discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the first thermal conductivity is at least 1.8 times greater than the second thermal conductivity (the friction body material has a thermal conductivity of 0.05-20 W/m
∙
K, compared with the thermal conductivity of air of 0.02587 W/m
∙
K).
Regarding claim 19 in the alternative, Wase discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the second thermal conductivity is less than about 0.30 W/m
∙
K (the thermal conductivity of air of 0.02587 W/m
∙
K).
Regarding claim 20 in the alternative, Wase discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the second thermal conductivity is less than about 0.15 W/m
∙
K (the thermal conductivity of air of 0.02587 W/m
∙
K).
Regarding claim 21 in the alternative, Wase discloses the friction body according to claim 1, wherein the second thermal conductivity is less than about 0.05 W/(m -K) (the thermal conductivity of air of 0.02587 W/m
∙
K).
Regarding claim 34, Wase discloses a writing instrument (1) or a cap for capping the tip of a writing instrument comprising the friction body of claim 1 (Fig. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY S OLIVER whose telephone number is (571)270-3787. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7-3 ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571)270-3735. 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.
/BRADLEY S OLIVER/Examiner, Art Unit 3754