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 § 101/112 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is not supported by either a specific and substantial asserted utility or a well-established utility. Each of the claims recite a method of using a composition without reciting the steps for how the composition is used Claims 13, 15 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. Specifically, because the claimed invention is not supported by either a specific and substiantial asserted utility or a well-established utility for the reasons set forth above, one skilled in the art clearly would not know how to use the claimed invention. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 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. Claim s 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dr. Fischer Bianca et al . (EP 3 636 714 A1) In regards to claim 1, Bianca teaches thermoplastic components comprising polycaprolactam (i.e., polyamide) and polypropylene and their use in cooling circuits in automobiles (abstract). The component comprises polyamide 6 (PA 6) as polycaprolactam at from 20 to 85%, 5 to 35% polypropylene , and 5 to 65% of reinforcing material [0011]. The component can also comprise from 0.5 to 2% of compatibilizer such as polypropylene homopolymer or copolymer grafted with maleic anhydride [0016]. While the amount of the polypropylene of up to 35% does not overlap the claimed range, it is so close as to be obvious. A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . In regards to claim 2, Bianca teaches the composition having the claimed limitation as previously stated. In regards to claim 3, Bianca teaches the composition wherein the PA has a viscosity number of from 100 to 200 cm 3 /g (i.e., ml/g) [0014]. In regards to claim 4, Bianca teaches the composition having the claimed limitation as previously stated. In regards to claim 5, Bianca teaches the composition wherein the propylene has a melt index (MFR) of from 0.3 to 50 g/10 mins [0015]. Since the polypropylene is not required to be a copolymer, homopolymers are inherent or obvious. In regards to claims 6 – 8 , Bianca teaches the composition having the claimed limitations. In regards to claim s 9 , 10, Bianca teaches the composition wherein the reinforcing filler can be glass fiber etc., having from 6 to 17 m m which can be coated such as with mica etc. (i.e., surface modified) [0018]. In regards to claims 11, 12, Bianca teaches the composition having stabilizers such as phenols or other additives at from 0.1 to 2.5% [0019, 0023]. In regards to claim s 1 3 – 17 , Bianca teaches the use of the composition in the cooling water circuit components of the claims thus providing the claimed method s of using , manufacturing and the article comprising the claimed component as claimed [0026]. In regards to claims 18 – 20, Bianca teaches the composition having the claimed limitations as previously discussed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT TAIWO OLADAPO whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3723 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 8-5pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Prem Singh can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-6381 . 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. /TAIWO OLADAPO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771