DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 6, 11, 13, 18 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
in claims 1-2, 11, 13, 18 and 19 “wt. %” and “wt %” should read “wt.%”,
in line 6, “the opposed facing “ should read “the opposing facing”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations "the front fibrous cover sheet" in line 7, and “the total dry weight” in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Please note, claims 2-20 are rendered indefinite as a result of their dependency on claim 1.
The term “about” in claim 1, line 9, and claim 13, line 13, is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 2 and 18-19 recite “an intermediate coating layer comprising 25-100 wt % on a dry basis alkali metal silicate”. It is unclear what the phrase “comprising 25-100 wt % on a dry basis alkali metal silicate” is referring to, thus, rendering claim indefinite. It is noted, that for the purpose of claim interpretation, the examiner will treat the aforementioned phrase as referring to 25-100 wt.% alkali metal silicate based on the total dry weight of the cured coating, as recited in claim 1.
Claims 4, 14 and 18 recite “5 to 50% of the total of the alkali metal polyborate”. The range 5 to 50% renders claim indefinite because it is unclear whether 5 to 50% refers to weight or volume percent. Furthermore, the phrase “of the total of the alkali metal polyborate” renders claim indefinite because it is unclear whether “the total of” refers to a total weight or total volume. It is noted that for the purpose of claim interpretation, the examiner will treat the aforementioned limitation as referring to a weight percent.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the mixture of the alkali metal polyborate and the alkali metal silicate”" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the alkali metal silicate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the polyborate salt" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the total weight of the dry coating" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 8, 11-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 20190382589), hereinafter referred to as LI.
Regarding claim 1, LI teaches a coated building panel comprising a fibrous panel or a gypsum wallboard comprising a backing side and an opposing facing side and having a cured coating layer disposed on at least one side of the building panel (paragraphs [0009]: a coated fibrous panel comprising a fibrous panel comprising a backing side and an opposing facing side having a cured coating layer disposed on at least one side of the panel; and [0053]: the panel core can include a calcium sulfate material (such as, gypsum and/or anhydrite));
the fibrous panel comprising the backing side and the opposing facing side (paragraphs [0009]: a coated fibrous panel comprising a fibrous panel comprising a backing side and an opposing facing side);
the gypsum board having a gypsum core and the backing side comprising a back fibrous cover sheet and the opposing facing side comprising a front cover sheet, wherein the gypsum core is between the front fibrous cover sheet and the back fibrous cover sheet (paragraphs [0009]: a coated fibrous panel comprising a fibrous panel comprising a backing side and an opposing facing side having a cured coating layer disposed on at least one side of the panel; and [0053]: the panel core can include a calcium sulfate material (such as, gypsum and/or anhydrite));
the cured coating layer comprising about 25 to 100 wt.% alkali metal polyborate silicate inorganic binder, based on the total dry weight of the cured coating (paragraph [0009]: the cured coating layer comprising about 10 to 100 wt.% inorganic binder, based on the total weight of the dry coating, wherein the inorganic binder comprises a borate salt and a metal silicate selected from the group consisting of alkali metal silicates). LI teaches a range which overlaps and renders obvious the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim. See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 2, LI teaches the coated building panel of claim 1, further comprising an intermediate coating layer comprising 25 -100 wt.% on a dry basis alkali metal silicate directly disposed on the at least one side of the building panel having the cured coating layer to be between the panel and the cured coating layer (paragraphs [0061]: the coated fibrous panel includes at least 2, 3, or 4 coating layers; each coating layer of the disclosure includes an inorganic binder, wherein the inorganic binder is present in an amount ranging from about 10 and 100 wt. %, based on the total weight of the dry coating layer, the inorganic binder includes a metal silicate selected from the group consisting of an alkali metal silicate; and [0045]: a coating composition including 60 wt. % of a 37.5% solids sodium silicate solution). LI teaches a range which overlaps and renders obvious the claimed range.
Regarding claim 3, LI teaches the coated building panel of claim 1, wherein the cured coating layer is directly disposed on the at least one side of the building panel having the cured coating layer (paragraph [0060]: depositing a coating layer on at least one side of the fibrous panel).
Regarding claim 4, LI teaches the coated building panel of claim 1, wherein the cured coating composition comprises a mixture of alkali metal polyborate and alkali metal silicate, wherein the alkali metal polyborate is 5 to 50% of the total of the alkali metal polyborate and the alkali metal silicate (paragraph [0045]: a coating composition including 60 wt. % of a 37.5% solids sodium silicate solution, 5 wt. % sodium tetraborate). Thus, LI teaches 8 wt% of alkali metal polyborate of the total of the alkali metal polyborate and the alkali metal silicate, which is within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 5, LI teaches the coated building panel of claim 1, wherein the alkali metal polyborate silicate binder results from a mixture of an alkali metal polyborate and an alkali metal silicate dissolved in water (paragraph [0009]: the inorganic binder comprises a borate salt and a metal silicate selected from the group consisting of an alkali metal silicate, and the inorganic binder is water soluble).
Regrading claim 8, LI teaches the coated building panel of claim 1, wherein the alkali metal silicate is selected from the group consisting of sodium silicate, potassium silicate, lithium silicate, and combinations thereof (paragraph [0027]: metal silicates include, but are not limited to, sodium silicate, potassium silicate, lithium silicate, and combinations thereof).
Regarding claim 11, LI teaches the coated building panel of claim 1, wherein the coating layer further comprises up to 75 wt.% inorganic filler based on the total weight of the dry coating, and the inorganic binder and the inorganic filler are not the same (paragraphs [0034]: the coating layer and/or coating composition of the coated fibrous panel according to the disclosure can include an inorganic filler; any inorganic solid, inert mineral or mineral-like material can be added as an inorganic filler; and [0038]: the inorganic filler can be included in an amount ranging from about 25 wt.% to about 75 wt.%). LI teaches a range which is within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 12, LI teaches the coated building panel of claim 11, wherein the inorganic filler is selected from the group consisting of clay, mica, sand, barium sulfate, silica, talc, aragonite, magnesia, olivine, dolomite, tremolite, xonolite, vermiculite, gypsum, perlite, limestone, magnesite, wollastonite, zinc oxide, zinc sulfate, hollow beads, bentonite salts, fly ash, bottom ash, coal ash, steel slag, iron slag, limestone slag, zeolite, and combinations thereof (paragraph [0035]: suitable mineral and mineral-like fillers include, for example, clay (e.g. kaolin clay or bentonite clay), mica, sand, barium sulfate, silica, talc, magnesia, olivine, dolomite, tremolite, xonolite, vermiculite, gypsum, perlite, limestone (calcite or aragonite), magnesite, wollastonite, zinc oxide, zinc sulfate, hollow beads, bentonite salts, fly ash, bottom ash, coal ash, steel slag, iron slag, limestone slag, zeolite, and combinations thereof).
Regarding claim 13, LI teaches a method of making the coated building panel of claim 1, comprising:
providing the building panel comprising a backing side and an opposing facing side, and
depositing a first coating layer of an aqueous coating composition comprising an inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder dissolved in water on at least one side of the building panel selected from the backing side and the opposing facing side, the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder comprising a mixture of an inorganic alkali metal polyborate and an inorganic alkali metal silicate (paragraph [0060]: a method of coating a fibrous panel including providing a fibrous panel having a backing side and an opposing facing side, and depositing a coating layer on at least one side of the fibrous panel),
curing the coating layer of the aqueous coating composition comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder to form a cured coating layer comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder (paragraph [0067]: after the curable coating composition of the disclosure has been applied to the panel, the coated fibrous panel can be dried or cured);
the cured coating layer comprising about 25 to 100 wt.% alkali metal polyborate silicate inorganic binder, based on the total dry weight of the cured coating (paragraphs [0060]: the inorganic binder is present in an amount between about 10 and 100 wt. %, based on the total weight of the dry first coating layer, the inorganic binder includes a borate salt and a metal silicate selected from the group consisting of an alkali metal silicate).
Regarding claim 14, LI teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the cured coating composition comprises a mixture of alkali metal polyborate and alkali metal silicate, wherein the alkali metal polyborate is 5 to 50% of the total of the alkali metal polyborate and the alkali metal silicate (paragraph [0045]: a coating composition including 60 wt. % of a 37.5% solids sodium silicate solution, 5 wt. % sodium tetraborate). LI teaches a range which overlaps and renders obvious the claimed range.
Regarding claim 16, LI teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the first coating layer is deposited by depositing a composition comprising the alkali metal polyborate and the alkali metal silicate to form the cured coating layer comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder (paragraph [0061]: the coated fibrous panel includes one coating layer comprising an inorganic binder according to the disclosure, the coated fibrous panel includes at least 2, 3, or 4 coating layers; each coating layer of the disclosure includes an inorganic binder including a borate salt and an alkali metal silicate).
Regarding claim 17, LI teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the first coating layer is deposited by depositing a composition comprising the alkali metal polyborate and depositing a composition comprising the alkali metal silicate to mix on the building panel to form the cured coating layer comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder (paragraph [0042]: the curable coating composition may be prepared by admixing the inorganic binder, and other optional components (e.g. the inorganic filler) using conventional mixing techniques; typically, the inorganic binder(s) including the borate salt and metal silicate, followed by the other optional components in descending order according to the dry wt. % amount; the coating composition can then be deposited on the fibrous panel to form the coating layer). Furthermore, according to MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(C): “The selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946); Selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious. In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930)”.
Regarding claim 18, LI teaches the method of claim 13, further comprising: depositing directly on the building panel an intermediate coating layer aqueous composition comprising 25-100 wt.% on a dry basis alkali metal silicate directly disposed on the at least one side of the building panel prior to depositing the aqueous coating composition comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder dissolved in water on the at least one side of the building panel (paragraphs [0061]: the coated fibrous panel includes at least 2, 3, or 4 coating layers; each coating layer of the disclosure includes an inorganic binder, wherein the inorganic binder is present in an amount ranging from about 10 and 100 wt. %, based on the total weight of the dry coating layer, the inorganic binder includes a metal silicate selected from the group consisting of an alkali metal silicate; and [0045]: a coating composition including 60 wt. % of a 37.5% solids sodium silicate solution).
Regarding claim 19, LI teaches the method of claim 13, wherein a composition comprising the alkali metal silicate and a composition comprising the alkali metal polyborate are individually deposited on the building panel to mix on the at least one side of the building panel and form the aqueous coating composition comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder for the first coating layer (paragraph [0042]: the curable coating composition may be prepared by admixing the inorganic binder, and other optional components (e.g. the inorganic filler) using conventional mixing techniques; typically, the inorganic binder(s) including the borate salt and metal silicate, followed by the other optional components in descending order according to the dry wt. % amount; the coating composition can then be deposited on the fibrous panel to form the coating layer). Furthermore, according to MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(C): “The selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946); Selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious. In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930)”.
Please note that the limitation “optionally further comprising, prior to depositing the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder dissolved in water on the at least one side of the building panel, depositing directly on the at least one side of the building panel an intermediate coating layer aqueous composition comprising 25 -100 wt.% on a dry basis alkali metal silicate, and curing the intermediate coating layer composition” is not positively required by the claim.
Regarding claim 20, LI teaches the method of claim 13, further comprising:
depositing directly on the cured first coating layer a second coating layer of an aqueous coating composition comprising an inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder dissolved in water on at least one side of the building panel, the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder comprising a mixture of an inorganic alkali metal polyborate and an inorganic alkali metal silicate (paragraph [0061]: depositing a coating layer on at least one side of the fibrous panel; the inorganic binder includes a borate salt and a metal silicate selected from the group consisting of an alkali metal silicate),
curing the second coating layer of the aqueous coating composition comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder to form a second cured coating layer comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder (paragraphs [0061]: the coated fibrous panel includes at least 2, 3, or 4 coating layers up to 8, 9, or 10 coating layers comprising an inorganic binder; and [0067]: the coated fibrous panel can be dried after each individual coating layer is applied, drying the fibrous panel assists in the formation of a crosslinked/dehydrated solid borate salt and metal silicate coating layer);
wherein the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder is about 25 to 100 wt. % of the total weight of the second cured coating layer (paragraph [0061]: each coating layer of the disclosure includes an inorganic binder, wherein the inorganic binder is present in an amount ranging from about 10 and 100 wt. %, based on the total weight of the dry coating layer).
Claims 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hemphill et al. (US 20200392050), hereinafter referred to as HEMPHILL.
Regarding claim 1, HEMPHILL teaches a coated building panel comprising a fibrous panel or a gypsum wallboard comprising a backing side and an opposing facing side and having a cured coating layer disposed on at least one side of the building panel (paragraphs [0012]: a gypsum board includes two cover sheets, one as the face of the board, and the other as the back of the board; an inorganic binder-based coating is preferably applied to the back cover sheet on a surface facing out),
the fibrous panel comprising the backing side and the opposing facing side;
the gypsum board having a gypsum core and the backing side comprising a back fibrous cover sheet and the opposing facing side comprising a front cover sheet, wherein the gypsum core is between the front fibrous cover sheet and the back fibrous cover sheet (paragraphs [0012]: a gypsum board includes two cover sheets, one as the face of the board, and the other as the back of the board; and [0068]: the cover sheets may be formed from paper, fibrous mat);
the cured coating layer comprising about 25 to 100 wt.% alkali metal polyborate silicate inorganic binder, based on the total dry weight of the cured coating (paragraphs [0014]: the coating is generally an inorganic binder-based coating comprising a liquid binder and solid fillers; it is formed from a composition comprising an alkaline silicate, a solid filler, and optionally a borate; and [0015]: the inorganic binder can be included in the composition in any suitable amount, e.g., from about 10% to about 100% based on the total weight of solids in the dry coating composition). HEMPHILL teaches a range which overlaps and renders obvious the claimed range.
Regarding claim 13, HEMPHILL teaches a method of making the coated building panel of claim 1, comprising:
providing the building panel comprising a backing side and an opposing facing side, and
depositing a first coating layer of an aqueous coating composition comprising an inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder dissolved in water on at least one side of the building panel selected from the backing side and the opposing facing side, the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder comprising a mixture of an inorganic alkali metal polyborate and an inorganic alkali metal silicate (paragraphs [0012]: a gypsum board includes two cover sheets, one as the face of the board, and the other as the back of the board; an inorganic binder-based coating is preferably applied to the back cover sheet on a surface facing out; [0014]: the coating is generally an inorganic binder-based coating comprising a liquid binder and solid fillers; it is formed from a composition comprising an alkaline silicate, a solid filler, and optionally a borate; and [0018]: the composition forming the inorganic binder-based coating is aqueous),
curing the coating layer of the aqueous coating composition comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder to form a cured coating layer comprising the inorganic alkali metal polyborate silicate binder (paragraph [0022]: allowing the inorganic based coating to dry);
the cured coating layer comprising about 25 to 100 wt.% alkali metal polyborate silicate inorganic binder, based on the total dry weight of the cured coating (paragraphs [0060]: the inorganic binder is present in an amount between about 10 and 100 wt.%, based on the total weight of the dry first coating layer, the inorganic binder includes a borate salt and a metal silicate selected from the group consisting of an alkali metal silicate).
Claims 6-7, 9-10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEMPHILL in view of Tsuyumoto et al. (Preparation of highly concentrated aqueous solution of sodium borate, Inorganic Chemistry Communications, 2007, 10, 20-22), hereinafter referred to as TSUYUMOTO.
Regarding claim 6, HEMPHILL teaches the coated building panel of claim 1. While HEMPHILL discloses a composite gypsum board, wherein fire resistance in a gypsum wallboard can be enhanced by the use of an inorganic binder-based coating applied on an outer surface of a back cover sheet of the board; and that an inorganic binder comprising a borate salt (e.g., sodium metaborate, sodium tetraborate) (see HEMPHILL at paragraphs [0007], [0014] and [0017]), HEMHILL fails to explicitly teach wherein the polyborate comprises a final reaction product of a boric acid compound and an alkali metal borate in water, wherein the inorganic binder is less than 5 wt.% borate other than said polyborate and less than 5 wt.% boric acid.
However, TSUYUMOTO discloses that borax (Na2[B4O5(OH)]·8H2O) shows fireproofing effect for cellulose-based materials such as wood and paper, and that a highly concentrated aqueous solution of borate at room temperature is desirable (see TSUYUMOTO at left column, p. 20). TSUYUMOTO teaches that when the mixture of boric acid and borax was dissolved at a certain ratio in hot water, it was found that the solution did not show recrystallization after cooling to room temperature; this was not oversaturation because the solutions remained transparent without any precipitation; and that the solution prepared by dissolving 20 g of boric acid and 25 g of borax into 100 g of hot water over 80° C did not recrystallize at 20° C (see TSUYUMOTO at right column, p. 20). Additionally, TSUYUMOTO teaches that the disclosed concentrated sodium borate solutions are useful as fireproofing agents because of a remarkable fireproofing effect for cellulose-based materials such as wood and paper (see TSUYUMOTO at left column, p. 22).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the potential benefit of improving the composite gypsum board with enhanced fire resistance of HEMPHILL by utilizing the concentrated sodium borate solutions resulting from reaction of boric acid and alkali metal borate in water as disclosed by TSUYUMOTO since TSUYUMOTO explicitly teaches that the disclosed concentrated sodium borate solutions are useful as fireproofing agents (see TSUYUMOTO at left column, p. 22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the composite gypsum board with enhanced fire resistance of HEMPHILL by utilizing the concentrated sodium borate solutions resulting from reaction of boric acid and alkali metal borate in water as disclosed by TSUYUMOTO in order to enhance fire resistance of the board.
Moreover, since HEMPHILL discloses that borate salts can be included in the composition in any suitable amount, e.g., from about 0.5% to about 10%, based on the total weight of solids in the dry coating composition (see HEMPHILL at paragraph [0017]), the inorganic binder of HEMPHILL as modified by TSUYUMOTO would be less than 5 wt.% borate other than said polyborate and less than 5 wt.% boric acid.
Regarding claim 7, HEMPHILL teaches the coated building panel of claim 1. Furthermore, the motivation for modifying the composite gypsum board with enhanced fire resistance of HEMPHILL by utilizing the concentrated sodium borate solutions resulting from reaction of boric acid and alkali metal borate in water as disclosed by TSUYUMOTO was discussed in the rejection of claim 6 above spanning paragraphs on pages 15-16. Since TSUYUMOTO discloses that the solutions remained transparent without any precipitation (see TSUYUMOTO at right column, p. 20), and HEMPHILL teaches an inorganic binder comprising alkaline silicates, such as sodium silicates and borates, e.g., sodium tetraborate, which fully dissolve in water, in amounts that overlap with the claimed ranges; and that the composition forming the inorganic binder-based coating is aqueous (see HEMPHILL at paragraphs [0015] and [0017-18]), one of ordinary skill in the art would have anticipated the mixture of the alkali metal polyborate and the alkali metal silicate dissolved in water of HEMPHILL as modified by TSUYUMOTO to be transparent.
Regarding claim 9, HEMPHILL teaches the coated building panel of claim 1. Furthermore, the motivation for modifying the composite gypsum board with enhanced fire resistance of HEMPHILL by utilizing the concentrated sodium borate solutions resulting from reaction of boric acid and alkali metal borate in water as disclosed by TSUYUMOTO was discussed in the rejection of claim 6 above spanning paragraphs on pages 15-16. Thus, HEMPHILL as modified by TSUYUMOTO teaches the coated building panel, wherein the polyborate salt is made from reacting a boric acid with an alkali borate selected from the group consisting of sodium metaborate, sodium tetraborate, potassium tetraborate, potassium pentaborate, ammonium pentaborate, borax decahydrate, boric oxide, lithium borate, and combinations thereof at a temperature in a range of 175 to 195°F (see TSUYUMOTO at right column, p. 20: the solution prepared by dissolving 20 g of boric acid and 25 g of borax into 100 g of hot water over 80°C/176°F). TSUYUMOTO teaches reacting boric acid and sodium tetraborate at 176°F, which is within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 10, HEMPHILL teaches the coated building panel of claim 1, wherein the inorganic binder comprises sodium silicate and the polyborate (see HEMPHILL at paragraphs [0014]: inorganic binder is formed from a composition comprising an alkaline silicate and optionally a borate; [0015]: silicates can be any type of alkaline silicates, such as sodium silicates; and [0017]: the borate salts can be any type of borates which partially or fully dissolve in water, such as sodium tetraborate). Furthermore, the motivation for modifying the composite gypsum board with enhanced fire resistance of HEMPHILL by utilizing the concentrated sodium borate solutions resulting from reaction of boric acid and alkali metal borate in water as disclosed by TSUYUMOTO was discussed in the rejection of claim 6 above spanning paragraphs on pages 15-16. Thus, HEMPHILL as modified by TSUYUMOTO teaches the coated building panel, wherein the polyborate comprises a final reaction product of the boric acid compound and sodium tetraborate (see TSUYUMOTO at right column, p. 20: the solution prepared by dissolving 20 g of boric acid and 25 g of borax into 100 g of hot water).
Regrading claim 15, HEMPHILL teaches the method of claim 13. While HEMPHILL discloses a composite gypsum board, coating composition and method of making gypsum board, wherein fire resistance in a gypsum wallboard can be enhanced by the use of an inorganic binder-based coating applied on an outer surface of a back cover sheet of the board; and that an inorganic binder comprising a borate salt (e.g., sodium metaborate, sodium tetraborate) (see HEMPHILL at paragraphs [0007], [0014] and [0017]), HEMPHILL fails to explicitly teach wherein the polyborate comprises a final reaction product of a boric acid compound and an alkali metal borate in water, wherein the inorganic binder is less than 5 wt.% borate other than said polyborate and less than 5 wt.% boric acid.
However, TSUYUMOTO discloses that borax (Na2[B4O5(OH)]·8H2O) shows fireproofing effect for cellulose-based materials such as wood and paper, and that a highly concentrated aqueous solution of borate at room temperature is desirable (see TSUYUMOTO at left column, p. 20). TSUYUMOTO teaches that when the mixture of boric acid and borax was dissolved at a certain ratio in hot water, it was found that the solution did not show recrystallization after cooling to room temperature; this was not oversaturation because the solutions remained transparent without any precipitation; and that the solution prepared by dissolving 20 g of boric acid and 25 g of borax into 100 g of hot water over 80° C did not recrystallize at 20° C (see TSUYUMOTO at right column, p. 20). Additionally, TSUYUMOTO teaches that the disclosed concentrated sodium borate solutions are useful as fireproofing agents because of a remarkable fireproofing effect for cellulose-based materials such as wood and paper (see TSUYUMOTO at left column, p. 22).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the potential benefit of improving the composite gypsum board with enhanced fire resistance of HEMPHILL by utilizing the concentrated sodium borate solutions resulting from reaction of boric acid and alkali metal borate in water as disclosed by TSUYUMOTO since TSUYUMOTO explicitly teaches that the disclosed concentrated sodium borate solutions are useful as fireproofing agents (see TSUYUMOTO at left column, p. 22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the composite gypsum board with enhanced fire resistance of HEMPHILL by utilizing the concentrated sodium borate solutions resulting from reaction of boric acid and alkali metal borate in water as disclosed by TSUYUMOTO in order to enhance fire resistance of the board.
Moreover, since HEMPHILL discloses that borate salts can be included in the composition in any suitable amount, e.g., from about 0.5% to about 10%, based on the total weight of solids in the dry coating composition (see HEMPHILL at paragraph [0017]), the inorganic binder of HEMPHILL as modified by TSUYUMOTO would be less than 5 wt.% borate other than said polyborate and less than 5 wt.% boric acid. Since TSUYUMOTO discloses that the solutions remained transparent without any precipitation (see TSUYUMOTO at right column, p. 20), and HEMPHILL teaches an inorganic binder comprising alkaline silicates, such as sodium silicates and borates, e.g., sodium tetraborate, which fully dissolve in water, in amounts that overlap with the claimed ranges (see HEMPHILL at paragraphs [0015] and [0017]), one of ordinary skill in the art would have anticipated the inorganic binder of HEMPHILL as modified by TSUYUMOTO to be water soluble and transparent.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Bai et al. (US 8993471 B2) discloses a coating composition and a coated article, wherein the coating composition generally includes an alkali metal silicate binder comprising a boric acid, borate, or combination thereof; alkali metal silicate binders suitable for use with the present invention include lithium silicate, sodium silicate, potassium silicate, and combinations thereof; a preferred boric acid is orthoboric acid and a preferred borate is sodium tetraborates (borax) (Col. 1, lines 32-38 and 50-61).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANASTASIA KUVAYSKAYA whose telephone number is (703)756-5437. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00am-5:00pm.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at 571-270-3149. 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.
/ANASTASIA A. KUVAYSKAYA/Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Prosecution Insights