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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
The restriction mailed on October 23, 2025 is withdrawn. Claims 1-12 are pending and under examination.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: There appears to be a space missing in the phrase “claim 1to”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 111043 in view of Zhang (Mechanisms on electrical breakdown strength increment of polyethylene by aromatic carbonyl compounds addition: a theoretical study. J Mol Model, 2013, 19, pp. 5429-5438); however, for convenience, the machine translation of EP ‘043 will be cited below.
EP ‘043 teaches a crosslinked low density polyolefin insulating material for a conductor, the insulating material comprising a stabilizer mixture which provides the material with excellent stabilization against watertrees and electrical trees and improved compatibility with crosslinked polyethylene, meaning that there is no separation during extrusion. EP ‘043 teaches the use of an organic peroxide for crosslinking, which meets applicants’ additive.
EP ‘043 teaches that stabilizer mixture as comprising an alcohol and 0.5-3 wt% of one or more of aliphatic, aromatic or mixed- substituted ketonic functional compounds, specifically listed to include acetophenone and benzophenone.
Acetophenone is an aromatic homologue of 1-acetonaphthone, 2-acetonaphthone and 9-acetylanthracene. These compounds are also suitable for use as voltage stabilizers in crosslinked polyolefins, as taught by Zhang, and meet the requirements of EP ‘043, as 1-acetonaphthone, 2-acetonaphthone and 9-acetylanthracene each have melting points below 80°C.
Therefore, choosing a combination of benzophenone and 1-acetonaphthone, 2-acetonaphthone or 9-acetylanthracene is prima facie obvious.
EP ‘043 in view of Zhang is prima facie obvious over instant claims 1-4, 7-12.
As to claim 5, EP ‘043 teaches the inclusion of a peroxide, where about 1-3 wt% is typically used in the art to carry out such crosslinking.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 111043 in view of Zhang (Mechanisms on electrical breakdown strength increment of polyethylene by aromatic carbonyl compounds addition: a theoretical study. J Mol Model, 2013, 19, pp. 5429-5438), as applied above to claims 1-5 and 7-12, and further in view of WO 2012/069864; however, for convenience, the machine translation of EP ‘043 will be cited below.
EP ‘043 in view of Zhang is prima facie obvious over instant claims 1-5 and 7-12, as described above and applied herein as such, as EP ‘043 teaches an organic peroxide crosslinked low density polyolefin insulating material for a conductor, the insulating material comprising a stabilizer mixture comprising an alcohol and 0.5-3 wt% of one or more of aliphatic, aromatic or mixed- substituted ketonic functional compounds, specifically listed to include acetophenone and benzophenone, where 1-acetonaphthone, 2-acetonaphthone or 9-acetylanthracene are homologues of acetophenone and known to provide a similar stabilization as acetophenone.
EP ‘043 does not teach or suggest possible additives that can be added to the insulating material.
WO ‘864 teaches an energy cable with an insulating layer comprising a propylene based thermoplastic polymer material, at least one dielectric fluid intimately admixed with the thermoplastic polymer, the dielectric fluid being aromatic and having a ratio of number of aromatic carbon atoms to total number of carbon atoms greater than 0.3, and are taught in WO 02/03398 and WO 02/27731 (p. 11, ll. 1-2); and a branched benzophenone voltage stabilizer.
WO ‘864 teaches that minor amounts of additives such as antioxidants, processing aids, water tree retardants, or mixtures thereof can be added to the insulating material, where the antioxidant is exemplified in an amount of 0.3 wt%.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have added 0.3 wt% antioxidant to the insulating material of EP ‘043, as WO ‘864 teaches this as a suitable additive in similar energy cable insulating compositions.
EP ‘043 in view of Zhang and further in view of WO ‘864 is prima facie obvious over instant claim 6.
Claims 1-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2012/069864 in view of Perego (US 8,378,216).
WO ‘864 teaches an energy cable with an insulating layer comprising the following:
(a) a propylene based thermoplastic polymer material,
(b) at least one dielectric fluid intimately admixed with the thermoplastic polymer, the dielectric fluid being aromatic and having a ratio of number of aromatic carbon atoms to total number of carbon atoms greater than 0.3, and are taught in WO 02/03398 and WO 02/27731 (p. 11, ll. 1-2); and
(c) at least one voltage stabilizer selected from substituted benzophenones, which include 2,5-dimethylbenzophenone, which meet applicants’ formula (II) when Ar2 is an alkyl phenyl.
WO ‘864 does not teach or suggest the inclusion of the claimed acetoarenone compound.
Perego teaches an energy cable comprising at least one electrical conductor and at least one extruded coating layer including a thermoplastic polymer material in admixture with a dielectric fluid, wherein the dielectric fluid comprises a compound of formula (I): X-A-X’, where A is a monocyclic aromatic moiety or an at least partially aromatic condensed polycyclic moiety; and one of X and X’ is methyl or an aliphatic moiety, interrupted by one or more groups which include keto groups, and the other one of X and X’ being hydrogen. The compounds are specifically listed to include naphthyl ethyl ketone and naphthyl butyl ketone, where naphthyl methyl ketone is also within the scope of formula (I) of Perego, as X can be methyl as described above, and meets applicants’ formula (I) when Ar1 is 1- or 2-naphthyl. Perego appears to teach that these compounds provide the polymer material with a dielectric strength greater than those taught by the prior art, and mentions WO 02/03398 and WO 02/27731 in the background section, or at the very least are considered functional equivalents in the art of energy cables.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used the dielectric fluid of Perego in place of WO ‘864, as Perego directly teaches an improvement in the dielectric strength when using the compounds of Perego in place of those taught by WO ‘864.
WO ‘864 in view of Perego is prima facie obvious over instant claims 1-2.
As to claims 5-6, WO ‘864 teaches the weight ratio between the dielectric fluid and the polymer as 1:99 to 25:75 (p. 8, ll. 24-25) and the voltage stabilizer in an amount of 0.5-5 wt%, where WO ‘864 further teaches the optional inclusion of 1-50 wt% carbon black filler and exemplifies the inclusion of 0.3 wt% antioxidant.
This teaching suggests a composition comprising about 99-74.4 wt% polypropylene, 1-25 wt% dielectric fluid, 0.5 wt% benzophenone and 0.3 wt% antioxidant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIEANN R JOHNSTON whose telephone number is (571)270-7344. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM EST.
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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571)272-1302. 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.
/Brieann R Johnston/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766