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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/13/2026 has been entered.
Withdrawn Rejections
The 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 10, 12 and 13 as anticipated by Fujikawa et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0070631A1) of record in the previous Office Action mailed on 1/7/2026 has been withdrawn due to Applicant's amendment filed on 3/13/2026.
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 10 and 12-14 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 10 recites the limitation "the surface" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is requested.
Claims 12-14 are also rejected as being indefinite, since they depend from indefinite claim 10.
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 10, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujikawa et al. (US 2018/0162106) [hereinafter Fujikawa ‘106] in view of Fujikawa et al. (US 2019/0070631) [hereinafter Fujikawa ‘631].
Regarding claim 10, Fujikawa ‘106 discloses a plated molding comprising a molding (support) comprising a polyphenylene sulfide resin composition comprising 30 to 200 parts by weight of a fibrous filler based on 100 parts by weight of a polyphenylene sulfide resin (abstract; paragraphs [0041] and [0158]; Table 1), a plating layer directly disposed on a part or all of a surface of the molding (paragraphs [0048-0049], [0088], [0090] and [0158]; Table 1, Example 6), and wherein the polyphenylene sulfide resin comprises 20% by weight or more of a polyphenylene sulfide resin having MFR of 100 to 500 g/10 min at 315oC under a load of 2160g, where the total amount of the polyphenylene sulfide resin is 100% by weight (abstract; paragraphs [0023] and [0041]; Table 1).
Fujikawa ‘106 teaches the surface of the plating layer can be roughened (paragraphs [0005] and [0047]), but fails to specifically teach the surface of the plating layer having an arithmetic mean roughness of 1.5 µm or less.
Fujikawa ‘631 teaches a plated molding comprising a polyphenylene sulfide substrate having a metal plating layer formed thereon wherein the surface of the plating layer is roughened to have a ten-point average roughness Rz in the range from 0.01 to 4 µm, which would include an arithmetic mean roughness (Ra) of 1.5 µm or less, since Ra is deemed to be lower than Rz, for the purpose of enhancing adhesion (paragraph [0048]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify plated molding in Fujikawa ‘106 to have the surface of the plating layer roughened to have an Rz roughness in the range of 0.01 to 1.5 µm which would include an arithmetic mean roughness (Ra) of 1.5 µm or less, since Ra is deemed to be lower than Rz, for the purpose of enhancing adhesion between the support and the plating layer.
Regarding claim 12, Fujikawa ‘106 discloses the polyphenylene sulfide resin composition further comprising 1 to 30 parts by weight of a functional group containing olefinic copolymer containing at least one functional group selected from the group consisting of a glycidyl group, an acid anhydride group, a carboxyl group and a salt thereof, and an alkoxycarbonyl group based on 100 parts by weight of the polyphenylene sulfide resin (paragraphs [0032-0036]).
Regarding claim 13, Fujikawa ‘106 discloses the polyphenylene sulfide resin comprising 50% by weight or more of a polyphenylene sulfide resin having MFR of 100 to 500 g/10 min at 315oC under a load of 2160g, where the total amount of the polyphenylene sulfide resin is 100% by weight (abstract; paragraph [0023]; Table 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 3/13/2026, with respect to claims 10, 12 and 13 have been considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection which are presented above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE A SIMONE whose telephone number is (571)272-1501. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 571-270-1547. 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.
CATHERINE A. SIMONE
Examiner
Art Unit 1781
/Catherine A. Simone/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights