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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4, 16, 23-25, 31-32, 36-38, 44, 49, 52-54, 58-59, and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2013/0345371 to Anderson et al.
As to claims 1-4, 16, 23-25, 31-32, 36-38, 44, and 49, Anderson discloses a dual cure composition wherein the curing takes place under ambient conditions at temperatures from 20 to 25°C and upon exposure to actinic radiation (0276) wherein the composition comprises a polythioether that comprises at least 2 thiol functional groups and is the reaction product of an excess of thioether with vinyl reactants (0076-0077, 0113-0114), a diamine curing agent or a combination of diamine curing agent and a polythiol (0184-0195), and a further component that is react with thiol, vinyl, or amine groups such as epoxy functional polymers used in amounts that range from 0.5 to 20 wt% (0207) or polyisocyanate polymers used in amounts that range from 0.5 to 20 wt% (0210) dependent upon the desired application (0279) in the presence of tertiary amine catalysts (0165-0166, 0182).
Anderson discloses a curing temperature below 25°C for all types of curing mechanisms within the reference. Accordingly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists over the selection of cure temperatures based on the desired applications, such as in the aerospace industry as taught in Anderson (0271-0272). At the time of filing it would have been obvious to use the room temperature or lower cure as taught in Anderson for reducing costs and curing equipment and to tailor cure characteristics including preferred properties such as adhesion strength or peel strength (thiolene, Michael adducts) based on the reactants used to prepare the composition (0275-0279).
The gel time is not expressly disclosed. However, the reaction mechanisms including cure temperatures that are at room temperature are the same as currently claimed. It is also well known in the art that cure times are slower or faster depending on the functional groups of the curing agent. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude that the reactive amine curing agent with Michael acceptors would have faster gel times at room temperature than reactive amine curing agents with polyepoxides (0073, 0278)
As to claim 6, Anderson discloses a scenario wherein the composition comprises a Michael acceptor, a thiol functional polythioether, and amine or a combination of diamine and polythiol curing agents (0173, 0197).
As to claims 52-54, 58-59, and 63, Anderson discloses cured compositions and objects fabricated from the compositions in the fields of aerospace industry, automobile industry, or linings for fuel tanks (0271).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 16, 23-25, 31-32, 36-38, 44, 49, 52-54, 58-59, and 63 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL L LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-7450. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 7:00-4:00.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 571-272-1130. 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.
/MICHAEL L LEONARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights