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 .
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendments filed March 2, 2026. Claims 1-8 are pending. Claims 4 and 6 have been amended.
The rejection of claims 4 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, is withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments to the claims.
The rejection of Claims 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP6632016B1 in view of JP6523416B1 is withdrawn since the examiner did not include references to JP6632016B1 in the body of the rejection and reference to this application was simply a typographical error. Only JP 6523416B1 should have been cited and this is corrected in the rejection below. The body of the rejection itself is identical to that previously presented and was just amended to correct the typographical error. No new grounds of rejection are included.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou (JP6523416B1).
Itou teaches a synthetic fiber treatment agent that can improve the wettability, smoothness and heat resistance of the synthetic fiber surface comprising a smoothing agent and a two or more amine derivative nonionic surfactants (applicant’s claimed amine derivative (A), paragraph 0001,0024, see compounds (2)). Itou teaches the smoothing agent can be selected from amino modified silicone (paragraph 0014) and the nonionic surfactants are selected from two or more alkylene oxide adducts of alkyl amines (paragraph 0024) such as an ethylene oxide 10 molar adduct of dodecylamine (applicant’s claimed amine compound (A1) which is an alkylene oxide with 2 carbon atoms added at a ratio of 10 moles to 1 mole of an amine compound having a hydrocarbon group of 12 carbon atoms; paragraph 0054) and a 15 molar adduct of ethylene oxide of hexadecylamine (applicant’s claimed amine compound (A2) which is an amine compound having a hydrocarbon group of 16 carbon atoms which differs from the 12 carbon atoms of amine compound (A1) ; paragraph 0056). Itou teaches the composition further contains applicant’s claimed (poly)oxyalkylene derivative (C) such as dodecyl alcohol ethylene oxide adduct 10 moles, (applicant’s claimed (poly)oxyalkylene derivative (C) which is an alkylene oxide with 2 carbon atoms added at a ratio of 10 moles to total 1 mole of a monohydric aliphatic alcohol having hydroxy group in an alkyl chain with not less than 4 carbon atoms; paragraph 0063, C-1; paragraph 0024, see compounds (!)). Itou teaches the synthetic fiber is a carbon fiber precursor and a synthetic fiber having the synthetic fiber treatment agent adhered to (claims 1 and 7).
Itou does not teach the combination of (A1) and (A2) with the smoothing agent (B), alone or further in view of (C) in a single embodiment, but one of ordinary skill in the art could arrive at the claimed invention by selecting from the teachings of Itou. Itou does not specify the concentrations of (A), (B) alone of further in view of and (C) or that the (poly)oxyalkylene derivative (C) has a hydroxy group at a β-position in the alkyl chain.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the synthetic fiber treatment agents by selecting the claimed amine derivative (A) comprising amine compounds (A1) and (A2) and a smoothing agent alone or further in combination with (poly)oxyalkylene derivative (C) at the claimed percentages to apply and attach to a carbon fiber precursor as Itou teaches the composition when applied and attached to synthetic fibers such as carbon fiber precursors provides the fiber with the benefits of improved wettability, smoothness and heat resistance of the synthetic fiber surface. Itou allows for inclusion of 2 or more nonionic surfactants and can be selected from exemplified species meeting the limitations of compounds (A1), (A2) and (C), a smoothing agent selected from amino-modified silicones which is particularly excellent in smoothness and heat resistance. Selecting the claimed components from a list of effective nonionic surfactants and smoothing agents and adjusting the amounts of the components to the claimed concentrations to maximize the smoothness, heat resistance and wettability of the fiber would be obvious through routine experimentation.
Regarding the (poly)oxyalkylene derivative (C) has a hydroxy group at a β-position in the alkyl chain, the (poly)oxyalkylene derivative (C) compounds have a hydroxy group and selecting the location of the hydroxy group as the β-position would be obvious as all isomers of the compounds would be expected to perform similarly due to the close structural similarity. Note that structurally similar compounds are generally expected to have similar properties. In re Gvurik, 596 F. 2d 1012,201 USPQ 552. Closely related homologues, analogs and isomers in chemistry may create a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Dillon USPQ 2d 1 897,1904 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Payne 203 USPQ 245 (CCPA 1979); In re Mills 126 USPQ 5 13 (CCPA 1960); In re Henze 85 USPQ 261 (CCPA 1950); In re Hass 60 USPQ 544 (CCPA 1944).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed regarding Itou have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner argues that Itou does not recognize alleged unexpected results from the combination of the claimed amine derivative and the smoothing agent to provide improved bundling properties. The examiner argues that Itou clearly teaches selecting the claimed components all of which are taught as useful for treating synthetic fibers with the benefits of improved wettability, smoothness and heat resistance of the synthetic fiber surface. Selecting two or more surfactants as taught by Itou from the list of nonionic surfactants is obvious as they are taught to be able to be used in combination in addition to a smoothing agent to prepare the synthetic fiber treatment with the claimed benefits. Even if present in a list of possible nonionic surfactants all taught to be effective in the composition, selection is obvious absent a showing of unexpected results for selection of particular species of surfactants over other species. All disclosures of the prior art, including non-preferred embodiment, must be considered. See In re Lamberti and Konort, 192 USPQ 278 (CCPA 1967); In re Snow 176 USPQ, 328, 329 (CCPA 1973). Further the prior art is not only limited to compositions that are present in the examples. A reference is not limited to the working examples, see In re Fracalossi, 215 USPQ 569 (CCPA 1982).
Applicant alleges unexpected results, particularly improved bundling properties, for the claimed fiber treatment composition and indicates Table 1 of the specification demonstrates said results. The examiner argues applicant’s data in Table 1 is not commensurate in scope with the instant claims which comprise the entire genus of any smoothing agent and teaches no concentration limitations for either the amine derivative (A) or the smoothing agent (B). Only the molar ratio of (A1) to (A2) is claimed. The data in Table 1 contain data for only 6 species of smoothing agents, contain a polyoxyalkylene derivatives (C) which are not present in the claims and only contain (A1) with no inclusion of (A2). The data of the table 1 cannot be extended to the significantly different disclosure of the claims. While Table 2 in applicant’s specification teaches Blends of amines, it does not provide comparative bundling data. Since the data are not sufficient to demonstrate unexpected results, sections of the claimed components from the teachings of Itou are obvious to arrive at a synthetic fiber treatment with the benefits of improved wettability, smoothness and heat resistance of the synthetic fiber surface.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 AMINA S KHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5573. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5:30pm 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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.
/AMINA S KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761