Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/579,389

BICOMPONENT FIBERS WITH CURVATURE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 15, 2024
Priority
Sep 13, 2021 — provisional 63/243,320 +1 more
Examiner
JOHNSON, JENNA LEIGH
Art Unit
1789
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Dow Global Technologies LLC
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
2-3
OA Rounds
1y 5m
Est. Remaining
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allowance Rate
190 granted / 397 resolved
-17.1% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
422
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
82.7%
+42.7% vs TC avg
§102
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§112
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 397 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
CTNF 18/579,389 CTNF 78024 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments The response filed on March 4, 2026 has been entered. The applicant’s arguments (response, page 4) are sufficient to overcome the 35 USC 112 rejection set forth in the previous Office Action. The applicant’s arguments (Response, pages 6 – 7) are sufficient to overcome the 35 USC 103 rejection. The applicant’s arguments show that melt flow rate is not related to the polymer’s density. A new rejection is set forth below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1 – 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (WO 2020/106800) in view of Autran et al. (2005/0165173) and Ansems et al. (8,653,191) . Chen et al. discloses a multi-component fiber that shows a unique and unexpected degree of curliness or crimp as compared to multi-component fibers having different polyolefin based components (paragraph 4). Chen et al. discloses a curly fiber having a fiber centroid and comprising a first region having a first centroid and a second region (paragraphs 1 - 5, 11, 12, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 43 - 46, 59; claim 4; table 4). The first region comprises an ethylene/alpha olefin interpolymer composition in an amount of at least 75 weight percent based on total weight of the first region, a density of at least 0.930 g/cm 3 and a melt index (I2) in the range of from 10 to 60 g/10 minutes, wherein the I2 is measured according to ASTM D1238, 190ºC, 2.16 kg. (paragraphs 14 – 17). The remainder of the first region may be additional components such as propylene-based polymer (e.g. polypropylene homopolymer, propylene-ethylene copolymer, or propylene/ alpha-olefin interpolymer). The amount of the other polymer may be up to 25% (paragraphs 42 – 43). The first region of Chen et al. corresponds to the second region of the present application. The second region of Chen et al. comprises polypropylene at 75-99 weight percent with the remainder of the second region being additional components such as additives (paragraph 45). The second region is thus a material comprising a polymer which is different from the ethylene/alpha-olefin interpolymer of the first region. Additionally, the two regions are arranged such that at least one of the first centroid and the second centroid is not the same as the fiber centroid (Figure 2). The weight ratio of the first region to the second region is from 20:80 to 80:20. The second region of Chen et al. corresponds to the first region of the present application. While Chen et al. discloses a region comprising a polypropylene homopolymer blended with additives, Chen et al. fails to teach adding 10 to 50 wt.% of a propylene-ethylene interpolymer, based on the total weight of the blend, to the homopolymer. The difference at its minimum is thus the addition of 10 wt.% propylene-ethylene interpolymer to the second region comprising polypropylene of Chen et al. Autran is drawn to polypropylene blends and fibers made therefrom (Title). Autran et al. discloses a polymer blend that includes two polypropylenes, a first polypropylene made from a copolymer of propylene and ethylene with a lower melting point and lower melt flow rate than the second component of the blend (paragraphs 50 – 53). The first polymer can have a melt flow rate of 10 g/10 minutes to 40 g/10 minutes (paragraph 52). Further, the second polypropylene, with a higher melt flow rate and melting point, is a metallocene catalyst polypropylene (paragraphs 57 – 60). The blend comprises 25% - 75% of the first polymer and 75% - 25% of the second polymer. Autran et al. discloses that the combination of the two polymers together produce fibers with a unique combination of high performance in extensibility, softness and abrasion (paragraph 75). Further, Autran et al. discloses that the blend can be used in bicomponent fibers (paragraph 80 – 81). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the polypropylene component of the blend taught by Chen et al. can be modified to include 25% of a propylene and ethylene composition with a melt flow rate of 10 g/10 minutes – 40 g/10 minutes, as taught by Autran et al., since Autran et al. teaches the blend of the two polypropylene composition produces unique properties. While the Autran et al. suggests using propylene-ethylene copolymer, with similar melt flow properties, Autran et al. fails to teach the density of the polymers. Ansems et al. is drawn to polyolefin compositions including propylene-ethylene interpolymer compositions. Ansems et al. discloses that the propylene/ethylene interpolymer can have a density 0.85 g/cc to 0.93 g/cc (column 7, lines 60). Further, Ansems discloses that the propylene-ethylene interpolymer composition can have a density of less than 0.90 g/cc and greater than 0.85 g/cc (column 27, lines 16 – 22). And in another embodiment the propylene-ethylene interpolymer preferably has a density between 0.85 g/cc – 0.88 g/cc (column 27, lines 23 – 28). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to choose a density range between 0.85 and 0.88 g/cc, as suggested by Ansems et al. as a preferred density range for the propylene-ethylene interpolymer in Autran et al. Thus, claim 1 and 7 are rejected. With regards to claim 2, Chen et al. discloses a bicomponent fiber wherein the ethylene/alpha-olefin interpolymer composition has: a density in the range of 0.930 to 0.965 g/cc; (paragraph 15), a molecular weight distribution, expressed as the ratio of the weight average molecular weight to number average molecular weight (M W(gpc) / M N(GPC) ) as determined by GPC in the range of from 1.5 to 2.6; (paragraph 17), a tan delta at 1 radian/second of at least 45; (paragraph 19), a low temperature peak and a high temperature peak on an improved comonomer composition distribution (ICCD) elution profile by Crystallization Elution Fractionation between 50°C to 110°C (paragraph 21), and a full width at half maximum of the high temperature peak is less than 6.0 °C (paragraph 23). Thus, claim 2 is rejected. Further, Chen et al. discloses a bicomponent fiber wherein the first centroid or the second centroid is offset from the fiber centroid by at least 0.1 (paragraph 11). Thus, claim 3 is rejected. Also, Chen et al. discloses (claim 4) a bicomponent fiber wherein the first and second regions are arranged in core sheath, side by side, segmented pie, or islands-in-the-sea structures. Therefore, claim 4 is rejected. Chen et al. discloses a bicomponent fiber wherein the bicomponent fiber has a curvature of at least 1.6 mm, (see Table 4, last 2 examples). Thus, claim 5 is rejected. Finally, Chen discloses that the fiber can be a multi component with a third component that form discrete regions within a region of the fibers such as the core or sheath (paragraph 10) which is formed by a polymer different from those in the first or second component (claim 8). Thus, claim 6 is rejected. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jenna Johnson whose telephone number is (571)272-1472. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday, 10am - 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at (571) 270-7692. 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. jlj May 30, 2026 /JENNA L JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789 Application/Control Number: 18/579,389 Page 2 Art Unit: 1789 Application/Control Number: 18/579,389 Page 3 Art Unit: 1789 Application/Control Number: 18/579,389 Page 4 Art Unit: 1789 Application/Control Number: 18/579,389 Page 5 Art Unit: 1789
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 15, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Mar 04, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12662755
SELF-CLEANING FABRIC COVERS FOR AIRCRAFT FIXTURES
3y 7m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12630949
EMI PROTECTIVE SLEEVE AND METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION THEREOF
6y 4m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12605177
MANUAL DEBRIDING PAD
3y 8m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12571138
A Knitted Component Including Knit Openings Formed with Releasable Yarn
3y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12563328
TEXTILE ASSEMBLIES FOR SPEAKERS, INCLUDING TEXTILE ASSEMBLIES WITH INLAID TENSIONING YARNS, AND ASSOCIATED APPARATUSES AND METHODS
3y 3m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
48%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (+18.8%)
3y 11m (~1y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 397 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month