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 .
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 3, 4, 5 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.
Regarding claims 3, 4 and 5, the recited "includes... " renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. It is not clear whether the listed acids, metals or salts are required limitations or merely examples which may be interpreted as there are unlisted moieties outside of those being listed. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2019047174 see abstract and page 2 lines 3-15, page 3 lines 3-11, page 5 lines 14-17; in view of WO2017034873 see abstract, page 5 lines 10-16.
Regarding claim 1 directed to a recycling method of polyester cotton blended fabrics, comprising: cutting polyester cotton blend fabrics into fragments; placing the fragments in a reactor, adding a mixed aqueous solution of an acidic compound and a metal catalyst, raising a temperature to 110°C to 160°C, and carrying out a reaction for 1 to 6 hours to cleave the cotton fibers; and performing filtration and separation to obtain cotton powders and a polyester fiber.
WO2019047174 discloses cutting polyester cotton fabric into fragments, placing the fragments in an aqueous organic acid solution, heating the mixture in a high pressure reactor at 110C to 180C for 0.5 to 3 hours to degrade the cotton, and filtering the moisture to recover polyester fibers and cotton fragments. See page 3 lines 3-11. The reference also teaches that higher temperatures or longer reaction times produce smaller cotton fragment. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since the reference teaches controlling particle size through temperature and reaction time. See page 5 lines 14-17.
However, the refernece does not disclose the metal catalyst.
Note, WO2017034873 discloses treating polyester containing textiles with an aqueous solution containing an iron catalyst. See page 2 lines 3-15. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the iron catalyst of the WO2017034873 to the solution of WO2019047174 to remove dye during recycling and improve the recovered polyester value. See page 5 lines 10-16.
Regarding claim 2 directed to the recycling method of polyester cotton blended fabrics according to claim 1, wherein a pressure within the reactor ranges from 1.5 bars to 12 bars, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since WO2019047174 discloses an autogenous pressure of 0.10MPa to 1MPa, or approximately 1 bar to 10bar, which overlaps with the claimed range.
Regarding claim 3 directed to the recycling method of polyester cotton blended fabrics according to claim 1, wherein the acidic compound is an organic acid or an inorganic acid, the organic acid includes formic acid, acetic acid, oxalic acid, tartaric acid, citric acid, malic acid or methanesulfonic acid, and the inorganic acid includes hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid or phosphoric acid, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since WO2019047174 discloses methanesulfonic acid, oxalic acid, malic acid, formic acid, and acetic acid. See page 3 lines 12-14.
Regarding claim 4 directed to the recycling method of polyester cotton blended fabrics according to claim 1, wherein the metal catalyst includes metal compounds of copper, nickel, cobalt, iron or zinc, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since WO2017034873 discloses a metal compound of iron and meets the limitation requiring a compound of copper, nickel, cobalt, iron, or zinc.
Regarding claim 5 directed to the recycling method of polyester cotton blended fabrics according to claim 1, wherein the metal catalyst includes CuCl2, Ni(NO3)2, Co(NO3)2, FeCl3 or ZnCl2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since WO2017034873 discloses using a soluble iron salt that releases iron(II) or iron (III) ions and t FeCl3 is a soluble iron salt that makes iron(III) ions in an aqueous solution.
Regarding claim 6 directed to the recycling method of polyester cotton blended fabrics according to claim 1, wherein based on a total weight of the mixed aqueous solution, a content of the acidic compound is 0.1 wt% to 10 wt%, and a content of the metal catalyst is 0.1 wt% to 5 wt%, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since WO2019047174 discloses an organic acid concentration of 0.1wt% to 30wt% which overlaps the claimed range. See page 5 lines 1-5. Moreover, WO2017034873 discloses iron salt concentration of 0.05g/L to 5g/L which includes about 0.1wt% to .5wt%. See pages 5 and 6.
Regarding claim 7, the recycling method of polyester cotton blended fabrics according to claim 1, wherein a solid-liquid weight ratio of the fragments to the mixed aqueous solution is 1:5 to 1:50, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since WO2019047174 disclose a ratio of 1:30 to 1:200 which overlaps the claimed range by applicants. See page 5 lies 6-9.
In conclusion, in view of the above, there appears to be no significant difference between the reference(s) and that which is claimed by applicant(s). Any differences not specifically mentioned appear to be conventional. Consequently, the claimed invention cannot be deemed as unobvious and accordingly is unpatentable.
Information Disclosure Statement
Note that any future and/or present information disclosure statements must comply with 37 CFR § 1.98(b), which requires a list of the publications to include: the author (if any), title, relevant pages of the publication, date and place of publication to be submitted for consideration by the Office.
Improper Claim Dependency
Prior to allowance, any dependent claims should be rechecked for proper dependency if independent claims are cancelled.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERRESSA M BOYKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1069. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-5:30.
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, Heidi Kelley can be reached at 571 270-1831. 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.
/Terressa Boykin/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
Prosecution Insights