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 § 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 1-5 and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boyle et al. (PG Pub. 2005/0119447).
Regarding claim 1, Boyle discloses a polymeric composition [0008], (prefiber composition disclosed herein) comprising: one or more nylon, nylon-like polymer, nylon-based polymer [0043], (first fiber constituent may comprise at least one amide based compound like nylon-6; and Table 6 showing the use of nylon-6); and one or more associative compounds and/or hydrogen bond disrupting species [0008], (a gelling agent that solvates at least one of the fiber components, [0052], gelling agent comprises lactam; and Table 6 (showing the use of lactam), wherein the polymeric composition has a crystallinity that is at least 5 percent less than a nylon polymer [0140], (addition of lactam significantly changes the crystalline structure and Fig 25 showing the XRD pattern showing the 2theta peak significantly changing from nylon-6 by the addition of lactam (the significant change inferred as being more than 5 percent compared to the nylon polymer from the XRD results as indicated) and the one or more associative compounds and/or hydrogen bond disrupting species are present at a concentration of 0.1-35 percent by weight (Table 6 showing the use of lactam at 0.1-35 percent by weight).
Regarding claim 2, Boyle discloses a composition of claim 1 as discussed. Boyle further discloses wherein the nylon polymer is nylon 6 or nylon 66 (Examples).
Regarding claim 3, Boyle discloses a composition of claim 1 as discussed. Boyle further discloses wherein the crystallinity is at least 10 percent less than nylon (para [0140], addition of lactam significantly changes the crystalline structure and Fig 25 showing the XRD pattern showing the 2theta peak significantly changing from nylon-6 by the addition of lactam (the significant change inferred as being more than 10 percent compared to the nylon polymer from the XRD results as indicated).
Regarding claim 4, Boyle discloses a composition of claim 1 as discussed. Boyle further discloses wherein the one or more associative compounds are covalently attached to the one or more polymers (para [0059]. activating the fibers comprises forming chemical, such as covalent between the fibers and the other components).
Regarding claim 5, Boyle discloses a composition of claim 1 as discussed. Boyle further discloses wherein the one or more associative compounds are not covalently attached to the one or more polymers (para (0059], activating the fibers comprises forming chemical, such as ionic or hydrogen and/or physical such as adhesion bonds between the fibers and the other components).
Regarding claim 12, Boyle discloses a composition of claim 1 as discussed. Boyle further discloses fiber comprising the polymeric material (para [0066], resulting gels were spun into fiber product).
Regarding claim 13, Boyle discloses a fiber of claim 12 as discussed. Boyle further discloses fabric comprising a plurality of fibers (para [0062]. Fabric product).
Regarding claim 14, Boyle discloses a fabric of claim 13 as discussed. Boyle further
discloses further comprising one or more different fibers that do not comprise associative compounds and/or hydrogen bond disrupting species (para [0056]. minority fiber may then be combined with a "host" fiber or bulked continuous filament (BCF) "host”· fiber to create a carpet product).
Regarding claim 15, Boyle discloses a fabric of claim 14 as discussed. Boyle further discloses wherein the one or more different fibers comprise nylon 6 and/or nylon 66 (Table 6 disclosing the use of nylon-6).
Regarding claim 16, Boyle discloses a fabric of claim 13 as discussed. Boyle further discloses wherein the fabric is woven, crocheted, knitted, felted, or spun (para [0057), ii can be spun into a fiber).
Regarding claim 17, Boyle discloses a fabric of claim 16 as discussed. Boyle further discloses wherein the fabric is woven (para (0042), constituents is capable of being used as a fiber material, especially in yarn products, fabric/ textile products).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyle et al. (PG Pub. 2005/0119447) in view of Daumiller et al. (US Pat. 3,428,710).
Regarding claim 6, Boyle discloses a composition of claim 1 as discussed. Boyle does not specifically disclose wherein the associative compound is a short chain polyamide terminally modified such that one or more termini of the short chain polyamide has at least one functional group chosen from aldehydes, epoxides, acid chlorides, amines, alcohols, or combinations thereof. However, Daumiller discloses the making of a nylon based composition (col 3 In 1-5; All fiber-forming high molecular weight polyamides, particularly nylon 6 and nylon 6,6, may be given an antistatic finish according to this invention), wherein the associative compound is a short chain polyamide terminally modified such that one or more termini of the short chain polyamide has at least one functional group (col 2 In 50-55; short chain polyamide containing terminal groups) but not specifically functional group chosen from aldehydes. epoxides, acid chlorides, amines, alcohols, or combinations thereof. However, Daumiller teaches that the terminal group is a carboxylic acid (col 2 In 50-55; terminal carboxylic groups) catalyzed by a chloride (col 3 In 55-60; reaction may be carried out in presence of lewis acids like aluminum chloride); it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to infer that the terminal functional group can be an acid chloride through routine experimentation to facilitate reaction. Moreover, as both Boyle and Daumiller teach compositions made by adding an associate compound to nylon; it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings and use the short chain terminal functional polyamide disclosed by Daumiller in the composition disclosed by Boyle, as it provides for better properties (Daumiller, col 3 In 1-5; antistatic finish according to this invention), through routine experimentation.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyle et al. (PG Pub. 2005/0119447) in view of Harashina et al. (PG Pub. 2006/0074154).
Regarding claim 7, Boyle discloses a composition of claim 1 as discussed. Boyle does not further disclose wherein the associative compound is chosen from polyamides, aliphatic epoxides, aliphatic amines, propylamine, short chain and long chain fatty acid, aliphatic
acids, and fatty acids. However, Harashina discloses a modified nylon composition (para [0053], the polyamide resin includes varieties of nylon like nylon-6), wherein the associated compound used is a long chain fatty acid (para [0201], examples of dicarboxylic acid include dimerized fatty acid like adipic acid). As both Boyle and Harashina disclose the making of modified nylon polymers, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the fatty acid disclosed by Harashina in the composition disclosed by Boyle, as it provides for improved properties (Harashina, para [0193], physical properties of the resultant shaped article. a polymer having a substantially linear structure, which is obtained by condensation polymerization is more preferred); through routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 8, Boyle in view of Harashina discloses a composition of claim 7 as discussed. Harashina further discloses wherein the aliphatic amine is chosen from ethylenediamine (para [0236], amine series curing agent like ethylenediamine).
Claim 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyle (PG Pub. 2005/0119447) in view of Jung et al. (PG Pub. 2007/0210482).
Regarding claim 10, Boyle discloses a composition of claim 1 as discussed. Boyle does not disclose the hydrogen bond disrupting species is a salt. However, Jung discloses a nylon composition (para {0042), the polyamide used is nylon 6,6) with associative compounds (para
[0073], films and fibers from nylon6,6/GaCl3), wherein the hydrogen bond disrupting species is a salt (para [0083], gallium chloride was added to nylon 6,6 chips, and instant application claim 12 disclosing the GaCl3). As both Boyle and Jung disclose the modified nylon
compositions; it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the gallium chloride disclosed by Jung in the composition disclosed by Boyle, as it provides for better properties (Jung para (0064), improve fiber properties at a reasonable cost);
through routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 11, Boyle in view of Jung discloses a composition of claim 10 as discussed. Jung further discloses wherein the salt is
GaC13 (para [0083). Gallium chloride).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyle et al. (PG Pub. 2005/0119447) Boyle in view of Harashina (PG Pub. 2006/0074154) in further view of Ton-That et al. (PG Pub. 2005/0191490).
Regarding claim 9, Boyle in view of Harashina discloses a composition of claim 7 as discussed. Neither Boyle nor Harashina discloses wherein the aliphatic epoxide is epoxidized polyisoprene, reactive natural rubber (epoxy-based), and epoxidized polybutadienes. However,
Ton-That discloses a modified nylon composition (para [0037), suitable polyamides used include nylon, and para [0047], crystalline polymers like nylon), with added associative compounds compatible with the polymer matrix (para [0014], compatible with the polymer matrix) wherein the aliphatic epoxide is epoxidized polyisoprene, reactive natural rubber (epoxy-based). and epoxidized polybutadienes (para [0061). the epoxy functionalized graft polymer is epoxidized polybutadiene, epoxidized polyisoprene and the like). As Boyle, Harashina and Ton-That, all teach modified nylon compositions; it would have been obvious to use the aliphatic epoxide disclosed by TonThat in the compositions disclosed by Boyle and Harashina, as it provides for better properties (Ton-That, para [0135), superior properties), through routine experimentation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Boyle does not teach the claimed crystallinity being 5% less than a nylon. First, is noted that the present claim language is extremely broad and recites crystallinity 5% less than just one nylon polymer without specifying which nylon polymer so it could be any nylon polymer with a high crystallinity and such a broad limitation is met by many nylon polymers. Second, Boyle plainly teaches reduction in crystallinity by the addition of lactam (the significant change inferred as being more than 5 percent compared to the nylon polymer from the XRD results as indicated) and the one or more associative compounds and/or hydrogen bond disrupting species are present at a concentration of 0.1-35 percent by weight. Moreover, given Boyle teaches such a similar composition made of such similar materials in such similar amounts, it is clear the crystallinity is at least 5% less than a nylon polymer. The present specification teaches the disruption decreases crystallinity which further substantiates the claimed decrease in crystallinity is taught by Boyle. Applicant is invited to amend the claims over the cited art.
Art Not Used but Relevant
US Pat. 3,428,710 teaches a polymeric composition comprising polyamide with an associative compound.
Conclusion
= THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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