DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the amendment and remarks filed on July 10th, 2026. Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11, and 13-23 are pending, with claims 21-23 being new.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed July 10th, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 7, whose subject matter has been incorporated into claim 1, under U.S.C. 103 has been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 2023/0101851 (Kawai et al.).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “step for,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses functional language without reciting sufficient actions to perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “performing nondestructive spectral analysis on (reference standards, sample, etc.)”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding actions described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient actions to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient actions to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-9, 11-12, and 14-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2025/0052674 (Ide et al.) in view of US 2023/0101851 (Kawai et al.).
Regarding claim 1, Ide et al. discloses a method for determining a composition of a paint or primer on a sample (“Further materials may be added to the overcoat including … colorants, …”), the method comprising:
creating a plurality of reference standards by applying a reference material to a reference substrate, wherein the reference material comprises a different ratio of a matrix material to an additive material for each of the plurality of reference standards (“Film-forming compositions for enveloping coated seeds are well known in the art, and a film overcoating can be optionally applied to the coated seeds. The film overcoat protects the coating layers and optionally allows for easy identification of the treated seeds. In general, additives are dissolved or dispersed in a liquid adhesive, usually a polymer into or with which seeds are dipped or sprayed before drying.” P 226);
performing nondestructive spectral analysis on each of the plurality of reference standards (“a. Acquiring a training data set comprising a plurality of spectrum representative of training samples and reference loading values measured for the chemical substance in the training samples, wherein the training samples are selected using a method for design of experiments so that the reference loading values for the chemical substance and matrix influences are distributed homogeneously within a variation room delimited by its boundaries;” P 247);
subjecting each of the plurality of reference standards to destructive analysis to characterize the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in each of the plurality of reference standards, and to correlate results of the destructive analysis and the nondestructive spectral analysis (“This actual amount is measured for training and validation samples using one of the reference quantification methods established in the field, in particular, using chromatographic methods such as High Pressure Liquid Chromatography (HPLC), Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography (UPLC) or Gas Chromatography (GC), gravimetric methods based on the applied product masses, or mass spectrometry.” P 242);
performing the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample by inspecting the paint or primer on the sample in situ (“a. Acquiring one or more spectrum representative of a sample of the coated bulk material, wherein said spectrum is a near-infrared, infrared or a Raman spectrum,” P 14); and
comparing results of the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample to the correlated results of the destructive analysis and the nondestructive spectral analysis on the plurality of the reference standards to determine the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample (“d. Computing loading value of the chemical substance(s) using the correlation model(s) of the one or more calibrations;” P 17).
Ide et al. does not use thermogravimetric analysis for the second analysis method and is further silent as to whether the paint or primer is cured. Kawai et al. discloses a method of thermogravimetric analysis that characterizes the ratio of matrix material to the additive material in a polymer coating (“The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to substitute the thermogravimetric analysis method of Kawai et al. for the methods disclosed in Ide et al. because the method allows for easy separation into organic polymers and additives and inorganic additives, without the need to separate out overlapping peaks from multiple inorganic additives. Regarding whether the paint or primer is cured, paints and related coatings are commonly cured in the art, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of a cured paint or primer if a coating of interest was a cured coating.
Regarding claim 4, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. disclose the method of claim 1, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of polymeric resin to the additive material (“In general, additives are dissolved or dispersed in a liquid adhesive, usually a polymer into or with which seeds are dipped or sprayed before drying.” P 226, also Kawai “The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49).
Regarding claim 5, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. disclose the method of claim 1, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of one or more of an epoxy resin, a polyurethane resin, or an acrylic resin to the additive material (“The binder may be selected from …acrylic copolymers, … polyacrylates, … polyurethans,” P 219).
Regarding claim 6, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. disclose the method of claim 1, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of the matrix material to one more of a pigment, filler, or dye (“Further materials may be added to the overcoat including … colorants, …”, also Kawai, table 1).
Regarding claim 8, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. disclose the method of claim 1, wherein performing the nondestructive spectral analysis comprises performing one or more of x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, infrared spectroscopy, near-infrared spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, terahertz spectroscopy, x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, or energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (“a. Acquiring one or more spectrum representative of a sample of the coated bulk material, wherein said spectrum is a near-infrared, infrared or a Raman spectrum,” P 13).
Regarding claim 9, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. disclose the method of claim 1, wherein applying the reference material to the reference substrate comprises applying an amount of the additive material in a range of 0-70 wt.% to the reference substrate (“In an example the coated seed comprises one or more binder(s) in an amount from about 0.01 to about 15% of the weight of the seed, a filler in an amount of up to about 70% of the weight of the seed, one or more active agents in an amount from about 0.005 to about 50% of the weight of the seed.” P 223).
Regarding claim 11, Ide et al. discloses a method for determining a composition of a paint or primer on a sample, the method comprising:
obtaining calibration data that correlates a ratio of matrix material to additive material with results of nondestructive spectral analysis (“b. Selecting one or more calibrations for multivariate data analysis based on the one or more chemical substances to be quantified, wherein the selected calibration is specific to the chemical substance to be quantified in the matrix and wherein said calibration comprises conducting spectrum pretreating steps and a multivariate data analysis using a multivariate correlation model trained for computing a loading value of the chemical substance(s) based on a signature spectrum relevant for the chemical substance(s) at stake in consideration of matrix influences;” P 15);
performing the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample by inspecting the paint or primer on the sample in situ (“a. Acquiring one or more spectrum representative of a sample of the coated bulk material, wherein said spectrum is a near-infrared, infrared or a Raman spectrum,” P 14); and
comparing results of the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample to the calibration data to determine the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample (“d. Computing loading value of the chemical substance(s) using the correlation model(s) of the one or more calibrations;” P 17).
Ide et al. does not use thermogravimetric analysis for the second analysis method and is further silent as to whether the paint or primer is cured. Kawai et al. discloses a method of thermogravimetric analysis that characterizes the ratio of matrix material to the additive material in a polymer coating (“The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to substitute the thermogravimetric analysis method of Kawai et al. for the methods disclosed in Ide et al. because the method allows for easy separation into organic polymers and additives and inorganic additives, without the need to separate out overlapping peaks from multiple inorganic additives. Regarding whether the paint or primer is cured, paints and related coatings are commonly cured in the art, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of a cured paint or primer if a coating of interest was a cured coating.
Regarding claim 14, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al.discloses the method of claim 11, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of polymeric resin to the additive material (“In general, additives are dissolved or dispersed in a liquid adhesive, usually a polymer into or with which seeds are dipped or sprayed before drying.” P 226).
Regarding claim 15, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 11, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of the matrix material to one more of a pigment, filler, or dye (“Further materials may be added to the overcoat including … colorants, …”, also Kawai, table 1).
Regarding claim 16, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 11, wherein performing the nondestructive spectral analysis comprises performing one or more of x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, infrared spectroscopy, near-infrared spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, terahertz spectroscopy, x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, or energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (“a. Acquiring one or more spectrum representative of a sample of the coated bulk material, wherein said spectrum is a near-infrared, infrared or a Raman spectrum,” P 13).
Regarding claim 18, Ide et al. discloses a computing system, comprising one or more processors (fig. 1, element 40) configured to:
receive a measurement of electromagnetic radiation reflected or emitted from a sample, the sample comprising a paint or primer, the measurement having been acquired by inspecting the paint or primer on the sample in situ using a nondestructive spectral analysis tool (fig. 1, element 42);
compare the measurement of the electromagnetic radiation reflected or emitted from the sample to calibration data that correlates a ratio of matrix material to additive material with reflected or emitted electromagnetic radiation from the sample (fig. 1, element 46, step d “d. Computing loading value of the chemical substance(s) using the correlation model(s) of the one or more calibrations;”); and
output a determined ratio of matrix material to additive material for the measurement (fig. 1, element 46, step e “e. Causing output of the computed loading value of the chemical substance(s), for example display on a user interface or causing transfer said value to a device configured to control a coating process.” P 18).
Ide et al. does not use thermogravimetric analysis for the second analysis method and is further silent as to whether the paint or primer is cured. Kawai et al. discloses a method of thermogravimetric analysis that characterizes the ratio of matrix material to the additive material in a polymer coating (“The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to substitute the thermogravimetric analysis method of Kawai et al. for the methods disclosed in Ide et al. because the method allows for easy separation into organic polymers and additives and inorganic additives, without the need to separate out overlapping peaks from multiple inorganic additives. Regarding whether the paint or primer is cured, paints and related coatings are commonly cured in the art, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of a cured paint or primer if a coating of interest was a cured coating.
Regarding claim 19, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 18, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of the matrix material to one more of a pigment, filler, or dye (“Further materials may be added to the overcoat including … colorants, …”, also Kawai, table 1).
Regarding claim 20, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the computing system of claim 18, wherein the measurement of the electromagnetic radiation reflected or emitted from the sample comprises light one or more of x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy data, infrared spectroscopy data, near-infrared spectroscopy data, Raman spectroscopy data, terahertz spectroscopy data, x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy data, or energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy data (“a. Acquiring one or more spectrum representative of a sample of the coated bulk material, wherein said spectrum is a near-infrared, infrared or a Raman spectrum,” P 13).
Regarding claim 21, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. disclose the computing system of claim 18, wherein the one or more processors are configured to determine the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material by determining a ratio of polymeric material to the additive material (“In general, additives are dissolved or dispersed in a liquid adhesive, usually a polymer into or with which seeds are dipped or sprayed before drying.” P 226).
Regarding claims 22 & 23, Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. disclose the claimed invention except it is silent as to whether the number of reference standards is in a range of 2 to 100 or 5 to 12 reference standards. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to make however many reference standards are needed to create a database covering the typical ratios used in the industry or by the company performing the testing, which may very well by a number between 2 to 100 or 5 to 12.
Claim(s) 10 & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ide et al. in view of Kawai et al. as applied to claims 1 & 11 above, and further in view of US 2025/0164391 (Fukuoka).
Regarding claims 10 & 17, Ide et al. disclose the claimed methods except for correlating the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample to one or more of durability, adhesion, corrosion resistance, color retention, gloss retention, chemical resistance, ease of application, flexibility, elasticity, or abrasion resistance. Fukuoka discloses a method for determining a composition of a material comprising a matrix material and an additive where the results of a spectral analysis of composition is correlated with durability (“An example in which a detection calibration curve is used as the property detection data will be described, but it may be, for example, table data in which a plurality of spectral characteristic values and corresponding mechanical property values are recorded.” P 40). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the methods of Ide et al. to include correlation of durability as in Fukuoka if information so that the durability of the paint or primer could be determined.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6, 8-9, 11, 13-16, 18-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2025/0052674 (Ide et al.) in view of US 2023/0101851 (Kawai et al.).
Regarding claim 1, Shelley et al. discloses a method for determining a composition of a paint or primer on a sample (“In one embodiment, the film coating may be a bond primer (organic containing material) that is formed on a metallic surface.” P 42), the method comprising:
creating a plurality of reference standards by applying a reference material to a reference substrate, wherein the reference material comprises a different ratio of a matrix material to an additive material for each of the plurality of reference standards (fig. 3, step 402);
performing nondestructive spectral analysis on each of the plurality of reference standards (fig. 3, step 404);
subjecting each of the plurality of reference standards to an additional analysis to characterize the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in each of the plurality of reference standards (“It will be appreciated that the amount of one or more compositional ingredients of the film may be separately determined by any established and calibrated means such as chemical analysis, x-ray, or electron spectroscopy.” P 41), and to correlate results of the additional analysis and the nondestructive spectral analysis (“Alternatively, one or more compositional ingredients and a film thickness may be separately correlated, such that one may independently determine a level of a compositional ingredient and a thickness of the film.” P 41);
performing the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample by inspecting the paint or primer on the sample in situ (“Thus, the measurements 205B and 205C are determined in-situ” P 46); and
comparing results of the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample to the correlated results of the destructive analysis and the nondestructive spectral analysis on the plurality of the reference standards to determine the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample (“comparing the relative change in the sample IR spectra with a predetermined correlation of changes in model IR spectra correlated (calibrated) with a known change in the thickness and/or amount of chrome in the bond primer, a quantifiable thickness of the bond primer and/or amount of chromium in the bond primer may be determined.” P 43).
Shelley et al. does not use thermogravimetric analysis for the second analysis method, and is further silent as to whether the paint or primer is cured. Kawai et al. discloses a method of thermogravimetric analysis that characterizes the ratio of matrix material to the additive material in a polymer coating (“The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to substitute the thermogravimetric analysis method of Kawai et al. for the methods disclosed in Shelley et al. because the method allows for easy separation into organic polymers and additives and inorganic additives, without the need to separate out overlapping peaks from multiple inorganic additives. Regarding whether the paint or primer is cured, paints and related coatings are commonly cured in the art, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of a cured paint or primer if a coating of interest was a cured coating.
Regarding claim 3, Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 1, wherein performing the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample comprises performing the nondestructive spectral analysis on a component of an aircraft (“For example, the metallic surface may be a titanium surface, such as a portion of an aircraft which may be bonded by use of the bond primer onto another portion of an aircraft, which may be a different material, including a polymer composite material.” P 42).
Regarding claim 4, Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of polymeric resin to the additive material (“In general, additives are dissolved or dispersed in a liquid adhesive, usually a polymer into or with which seeds are dipped or sprayed before drying.” P 226, also Kawai “The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49).
Regarding claim 6 Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of the matrix material to one more of a pigment, filler, or dye (“Further materials may be added to the overcoat including … colorants, …”, also Kawai, table 1).
Regarding claim 8 Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 1, wherein performing the nondestructive spectral analysis comprises performing one or more of x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, infrared spectroscopy, near-infrared spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, terahertz spectroscopy, x- ray photoelectron spectroscopy, or energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (“performing non-destructive Mid-IR spectroscopy measurements of surface” P 1).
Regarding claim 9 Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the claimed invention except it is silent as to whether the amount of the additive material is in a range of 0-70% to the reference substrate. Such levels of additive are known in the art and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use amounts of additives in this range if this was the amount needed for the desired effect.
Regarding claim 11, Shelley et al. discloses a method for determining a composition of a paint or primer on a sample (“In one embodiment, the film coating may be a bond primer (organic containing material) that is formed on a metallic surface.” P 42), the method comprising:
Obtaining calibration data that correlates a ratio of matrix to additive material with results of nondestructive spectral analysis (“Alternatively, one or more compositional ingredients and a film thickness may be separately correlated, such that one may independently determine a level of a compositional ingredient and a thickness of the film.” P 41);
performing the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample by inspecting the paint or primer on the sample in situ (“Thus, the measurements 205B and 205C are determined in-situ” P 46); and
comparing results of the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample to the calibration data to determine the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material (“comparing the relative change in the sample IR spectra with a predetermined correlation of changes in model IR spectra correlated (calibrated) with a known change in the thickness and/or amount of chrome in the bond primer, a quantifiable thickness of the bond primer and/or amount of chromium in the bond primer may be determined.” P 43).
Shelley et al. does not use thermogravimetric analysis for the second analysis method, and is further silent as to whether the paint or primer is cured. Kawai et al. discloses a method of thermogravimetric analysis that characterizes the ratio of matrix material to the additive material in a polymer coating (“The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to substitute the thermogravimetric analysis method of Kawai et al. for the methods disclosed in Shelley et al. because the method allows for easy separation into organic polymers and additives and inorganic additives, without the need to separate out overlapping peaks from multiple inorganic additives. Regarding whether the paint or primer is cured, paints and related coatings are commonly cured in the art, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of a cured paint or primer if a coating of interest was a cured coating.
Regarding claim 13, Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 11, wherein performing the nondestructive spectral analysis on the sample comprises performing the nondestructive spectral analysis on a component of an aircraft (“For example, the metallic surface may be a titanium surface, such as a portion of an aircraft which may be bonded by use of the bond primer onto another portion of an aircraft, which may be a different material, including a polymer composite material.” P 42).
Regarding claim 14, Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 11, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of polymeric resin to the additive material (“In general, additives are dissolved or dispersed in a liquid adhesive, usually a polymer into or with which seeds are dipped or sprayed before drying.” P 226, also Kawai “The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49).
Regarding claim 16 Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 11, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of the matrix material to one more of a pigment, filler, or dye (“Further materials may be added to the overcoat including … colorants, …”, also Kawai, table 1).
Regarding claim 16 Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 11, wherein performing the nondestructive spectral analysis comprises performing one or more of x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, infrared spectroscopy, near-infrared spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, terahertz spectroscopy, x- ray photoelectron spectroscopy, or energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (“performing non-destructive Mid-IR spectroscopy measurements of surface” P 1).
Regarding claim 11, Shelley et al. discloses a method for determining a composition of a paint or primer on a sample (“In one embodiment, the film coating may be a bond primer (organic containing material) that is formed on a metallic surface.” P 42), the method comprising:
receive a measurement of electromagnetic radiation reflected or emitted from a sample, the sample comprising a paint or primer, the measurement having been acquired by inspecting the paint or primer on the sample in situ using a nondestructive spectral analysis tool (“Thus, the measurements 205B and 205C are determined in-situ” P 46);
compare the measurement of the electromagnetic radiation reflected or emitted from the sample to calibration data that correlates a ratio of matrix material to additive material with reflected or emitted electromagnetic radiation from the sample (“comparing the relative change in the sample IR spectra with a predetermined correlation of changes in model IR spectra correlated (calibrated) with a known change in the thickness and/or amount of chrome in the bond primer, a quantifiable thickness of the bond primer and/or amount of chromium in the bond primer may be determined.” P 43); and
output a determined ratio of matrix material to additive material for the measurement (“a quantifiable thickness of the bond primer and/or amount of chromium in the bond primer may be determined.” P 43).
Shelley et al. does not use thermogravimetric analysis for the second analysis method, and is further silent as to whether the paint or primer is cured. Kawai et al. discloses a method of thermogravimetric analysis that characterizes the ratio of matrix material to the additive material in a polymer coating (“The dried resin coating layer was subjected to thermogravimetric determination … From the results of the thermogravimetric determination, the ratio of the weight at 800° C. to the weight at room temperature was assumed to be the inorganic additive content.” P 49). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to substitute the thermogravimetric analysis method of Kawai et al. for the methods disclosed in Shelley et al. because the method allows for easy separation into organic polymers and additives and inorganic additives, without the need to separate out overlapping peaks from multiple inorganic additives. Regarding whether the paint or primer is cured, paints and related coatings are commonly cured in the art, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of a cured paint or primer if a coating of interest was a cured coating.
Regarding claim 19 Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 18, wherein determining the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample comprises determining a ratio of the matrix material to one more of a pigment, filler, or dye (“Further materials may be added to the overcoat including … colorants, …”, also Kawai, table 1).
Regarding claim 20 Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. discloses the method of claim 18, wherein performing the nondestructive spectral analysis comprises performing one or more of x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, infrared spectroscopy, near-infrared spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, terahertz spectroscopy, x- ray photoelectron spectroscopy, or energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (“performing non-destructive Mid-IR spectroscopy measurements of surface” P 1).
Regarding claims 22 & 23, Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. disclose the claimed invention except it is silent as to whether the number of reference standards is in a range of 2 to 100 or 5 to 12 reference standards. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to make however many reference standards are needed to create a database covering the typical ratios used in the industry or by the company performing the testing, which may very well by a number between 2 to 100 or 5 to 12.
Claim(s) 10 & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelley et al. in view of Kawai et al. as applied to claims 1 & 11 above, and further in view of US 2025/0164391 (Fukuoka).
Regarding claims 10 & 17, Ide et al. disclose the claimed methods except for correlating the ratio of the matrix material to the additive material in the sample to one or more of durability, adhesion, corrosion resistance, color retention, gloss retention, chemical resistance, ease of application, flexibility, elasticity, or abrasion resistance. Fukuoka discloses a method for determining a composition of a material comprising a matrix material and an additive where the results of a spectral analysis of composition is correlated with durability (“An example in which a detection calibration curve is used as the property detection data will be described, but it may be, for example, table data in which a plurality of spectral characteristic values and corresponding mechanical property values are recorded.” P 40). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the methods of Ide et al. to include correlation of durability as in Fukuoka if information so that the durability of the paint or primer could be determined.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZA W OSENBAUGH-STEWART whose telephone number is (571)270-5782. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6pm Pacific Time M-F.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/ELIZA W OSENBAUGH-STEWART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights