DETAILED ACTION
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 1-18 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. The claims recite, “A high-strength and high-toughness flame-retardant thermoplastic PPE composite material,” the terms “high-strength and high-toughness” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms are 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. It is unclear what makes the composite material high-strength and high-toughness.
Claims 1-18 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. The claims recite, “A high-strength and high-toughness flame-retardant thermoplastic PPE composite material, comprising, by weight: 100 parts of PPE resin; 8-15 parts of HIPS resin: 8-13 parts of a halogen-free flame retardant; 0.5-3 parts of a lubricant/dispersant; 0.5-2 parts of an anti-UV agent; 2-8 parts of a toughener; 0.5-2 parts of a compatibilizer; and 0-2 parts if other auxiliary agents,” it is unclear to the weight bases of the components (e.g., based on the total weight of the composite material or based on a particular component).
Claims 1-18 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. The claims recite, “A high-strength and high-toughness flame-retardant thermoplastic PPE composite material,” the terms “high-strength and high-toughness” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms are 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 1-18 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. The claims recite, “wherein the toughener comprises a high-styrene SEBS and a styrene content in the structure of the high-styrene SEBS is not less than 40%,” the term “high-styrene SEBS,” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms are 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 4 and 13 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. The claim recite, “wherein the toughener further comprises a low-styrene SEBS, and the styrene content in the structure of the low-styrene SEBS is within the range of 28% to 33%,” the term “low-styrene SEBS” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms are 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 5 and 14 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. The claims recite, “wherein the lubricant/dispersant comprises an aliphatic amide and a functional compound, and the functional compound contains an aromatic benzene ring in its molecular structure; preferably, the functional compound is N-hexadecylbenzamide,” he claims recite terms, “preferably," which renders the claim to be indefinite because it is unclear to what extent the more preferred language further limits the less preferred language.
Closest Prior Art
ISHI et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0204263), one of the closest prior art of record, fails to teach a flame-retardant thermoplastic PPE composite material comprising, by weight of 100 parts of PPE resin, 0.5-2 parts of an anti-UV agent, and 0.5-2 parts of a compatibilizer and wherein the toughener comprises a high-styrene SEBS and a styrene content in the structure of the high-styrene SEBS is not less than 40%.
ISHI teaches a flame retardant composition comprising 70 to 99 parts by mass of a mixed resin of a polyphenylene ether resin and a styrene-based resin, 1 to 30 parts of a hydrogenated block copolymer (e.g., SBS, SBSB, (SB)4Si, and SBSBS), 5 to 30 parts by mass of phosphorus-containing flame retardant, and 0.1 parts of antioxidant (component F), however, ISHI is silent to the other claimed components in the composite material and wherein the toughener comprises a high-styrene SEBS and a styrene content in the structure of the high-styrene SEBS is not less than 40% which does not satisfy the claim limitations of the present invention. Therefore, ISIHI fails to disclose or render obvious the present invention.
CN 113652075A (hereinafter, BAO), one of the closest prior art of record, fails to teach a flame retardant thermoplastic PPE composite material comprising 0.5-2 parts of an anti-UV agent wherein the toughener comprises a high-styrene SEBS and a styrene content in the structure of the high-styrene SEBS is not less than 40%.
BAO teaches a halogen-free flame retardant composite material comprising 9-120 polyphenylene ether and high impact polystyrene compound and 3-50 parts of functional auxiliary agents wherein the functional auxiliary agents selected from at least one of flame retardant, compatibilizer, antioxidant, lubricant, glass fiber, antistatic agent and toughening agent. In an embodiment, the functional auxiliary agent include 9.9 parts of resorcinol-bis(diphenyl phosphate), 5.5 parts of compatibilizer, 0.33 parts of triphenyl phosphite, and 2.75 of a lubricant. However, BAO does not teach 0.5-2 parts of an anti-UV agent wherein the toughener comprises a high-styrene SEBS and a styrene content in the structure of the high-styrene SEBS is not less than 40% which does not satisfy the claim limitations of the present invention. Therefore, BAO fails to disclose or render obvious the present invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVE V HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-7738. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9 am-5 pm, EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at (571) 272-1130. 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.
DEVE V. HALL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1763
/DEVE V HALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights