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.
Claim 7 is 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 7 is rejected for the recitation of the for components A-D being at 100 parts by mass and claim 1 from which claim 1 depends recites 40-80 parts by mass of component A and yet claim 7 recites 5-60 parts by mass of component B, 3-30 parts by mass of component C and 3-70 parts by mass of component D. It is unclear how 40-80 parts by mass of component A could exist and yet have the upper end amounts of components B-D. For example, even at 40 parts by mass of component A, it is mathematically impossible to have 60 parts of component B and still have component C and D which are required by claim 1. Applicant is advised to amend the claim range of the components to be aligned with the amended amounts of component A in claim 1 along with required components B-D.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sakaguchi (JP2021055244).
Regarding claim 1, 8-9, Sakaguchi teaches an inorganic fiber (carbon or glass fibers) having an inorganic fiber sizing agent attached to the inorganic fibers wherein the inorganic fiber sizing comprises a vinyl ester compound (C2), surfactant (A) (surfactant is taught) and a fatty acid ester (E) (additive smoothing agent) [0060-0062]. The inorganic fiber sizing agent contains the vinyl ester compound at a ratio in the claimed range (10-95% is taught) [0062].
Regarding claim 2, the fatty acid ester (c) taught by Sakaguchi is an ester compound of monohydric alcohol with the claimed amount of carbon atoms and monobasic fatty acid with the claimed carbons (esters taught in 0061).
Regarding claim 3, Sakaguchi teaches fatty acid ester that include an ester compound of monohydric alcohol with the claimed amount of carbon atoms and monobasic fatty acid with the claimed carbons (including butyl stearate).
Regarding claims 5-6, the inorganic fiber sizing agent comprises an epoxy compound (C1) including a monoepoxy compound [0044 and 0062].
Regarding claim 7, Sakaguchi teaches the inorganic fiber sizing agent where the sum of the contents of the vinyl ester compound, surfactant, fatty acid ester and epoxy compound taken as 100 parts by mass, the inorganic fiber sizing agent has the claimed ratio of surfactant, fatty acid ester and epoxy compound [0062].
Regarding claim 10, Sakaguchi et al. teaches the inorganic fiber sizing agent contains vinyl ester compound in the claimed ratio [10-95 is taught in 0062].
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (JP 2016/151069).
Regarding claim 1 and 7-9, Yoshida et al. teaches an inorganic fiber (carbon or glass fibers) having an inorganic fiber sizing agent attached to the inorganic fibers wherein the inorganic fiber sizing comprises a vinyl ester compound (A) (vinyl ester resin), surfactant (B) (surfactant is taught) and a fatty acid ester (C) (fatty acid esters are taught as included) [Abstract, 0002, 0012, 0044, 0052-0053, 0058-0065 and 0074]. Yoshida et al. teach the inorganic fiber sizing comprising vinyl ester is 5-50%, surfactant is 5-30% and epoxy is 5-95%. Yoshida et al. teaches the inorganic fiber sizing includes fatty acid ester as a smoothing agent and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use smaller amounts of fatty acid agent. If the sum of the contents of the vinyl ester compound, surfactant, fatty acid ester and the epoxy compound in the inorganic fiber sizing agent is taken as 100 parts by mass of inorganic fiber sizing agent, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the claimed parts by mass of each of the components given the teachings of the amounts of vinyl ester compound, surfactant and epoxy and the claimed amount of fatty acid ester would have been understood to one of ordinary skill in the art to have been taught by Yoshida in smaller amounts, including the claimed amount. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the claimed amount of fatty acid ester in order to affect the sizing properties on the fiber including lubricity, wettability, plasticity, processability and composite performance and arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, the fatty acid ester (c) taught by Yoshida et al. is an ester compound of monohydric alcohol with the claimed amount of carbon atoms and monobasic fatty acid with the claimed carbons is taught in all the fatty acids in 0054 of Yoshida et al.
Regarding claim 3, Yoshida et al. fatty acid ester that include an ester compound of monohydric alcohol with the claimed amount of carbon atoms and monobasic fatty acid with the claimed carbons. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the fatty acid esters that include an ester compound of monohydric alcohol with the claimed amount of carbon atoms and monobasic fatty acid with the claimed carbons because they offer lighter weights since they short esters and quick wetting.
e.
Regarding claim 5, Yoshida et al. teach the inorganic fiber sizing agent further comprising epoxy compound (D) [0017-0018 and formula 11].
Regarding claim 6, Yoshida et al. teach the inorganic fiber sizing agent further comprising epoxy compound (D) including a monoepoxy compound [0017-0018 and formula 11].
Prior Art Not Used but Relevant
PG Pub. 2014/0228481 teach a sizing composition with a vinyl ester resin, surfactant and fatty acid ester.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWN MCKINNON whose telephone number is (571)272-6116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday generally 8:00am-5:00pm 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Shawn Mckinnon/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights