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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed as PCT/EP2022/0474132 dated 08/30/22. PCT/EP2021/074622 dated 09/07/21, PCT/EP2021/074623 dated 09/07/21, PCT/EP2021/074621 dated 09/07/21, PCT/EP2022/068793 dated 07/06/22 and PCT/EP2022/068794 dated 07/06/22. It is noted, however, the USPTO was unable to upload them and has sent communications to Applicants about the same dated 09/18/2024, 09/15/2024, 09/10/2024 and 09/09/2024. Please correct and reply accordingly.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Using the PGPUB version of 20240392080A1, at ¶¶ 0016, 0131, 0133, 0143, 0145 and 0146, there needs to be a comma not a period for 10,000 when describing the filaments, or elongated bodies. 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 11 and 12 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.
In Claim 11, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite as the metes and bounds of the claim is unclear. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
In Claims 11 and 12, the scope of the claim is unclear and thus indefinite as to whether “preferably” is a limitation to the claims or is merely suggestive of a preferred embodiment.
Claim 12 depends from both Claims 5 and 4.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is not supported by either a specific and substantial asserted utility or a well-established utility.
Claims 14 and 15 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. Specifically, because the claimed invention is not supported by either a specific and substantial asserted utility or a well-established utility for the reasons set forth above, one skilled in the art clearly would not know how to use the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2017060461A1 issued to Marissen et al. [USPUB 20240125018A1 is the US equivalent and is being used to cite paragraphs]. In view of EP2424907 issued to Kolb et al.
Regarding Claim 1, where Applicant seeks a composite elongated body, comprising high performance polyethylene HPPE filaments having a tenacity of at least 0.6 N/tex and a polymeric composition present throughout the composite elongated body, wherein the polymeric composition comprises a) a thermoplastic ethylene copolymer; and b) a polysiloxane; and wherein the thermoplastic ethylene copolymer is a copolymer of ethylene and wherein said polymeric composition has a peak melting temperature in the range from 40 to 140° C., measured in accordance with ASTM E794-06; Marissen et al. teach a method for making a lengthy body comprising high performance polyethylene fibres and a polymeric resin comprising the steps of applying an aqueous suspension of a polymeric resin to HPPE fibres, assembling the HPPE fibres, partially drying the aqueous suspension, optionally applying a temperature, tension and/or a pressure treatment to the lengthy body wherein the polymeric resin is a homopolymer or copolymer of ethylene and/or propylene. [abstract].
The invention further relates to lengthy bodies obtainable by said method and articles comprising the lengthy body such nets, round slings, splices, belts or synthetic chain links [abstract, ¶ 0003].
Marissen et al. teach a composite long object, and it is specifically disclosed (see page 1, line 2 to page 16, line 30) that a long object comprises high performance polyethylene fibers and a polymer resin throughout the long object providing high performance polyethylene (HPPE) fibers, the polymer resin being a homopolymer or copolymer of ethylene and/or propylene, and wherein the polymer resin has a peak melting temperature in the range of 40 to 140 ° C and is measured with ASTM E794 [¶ 0024]. In the instant reference teaches that the high performance polyethylene fibres are polyethylene fibres with a tensile strength of 1 .0 N/tex- 3.5 N/tex. They teach that is it known to apply polyorganosiloxane to HPPE fiber/ropes to improve bending fatigue or silicone compositions to in the manufacturing process. They also suggest at ¶ 0020, that the resin suspension may further comprise additives that modifying the properties of the suspension, the resin and or the prepared lengthy body.
EP2424907B1 issued to Kolb et al teach ethylene based copolymers with additives such as polysiloxane type, e.g., silicone oil and polydimethyl siloxane [¶¶ 0108-0109 and 0116].
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the product of Marissen et al. by adding additives such as silicone oil or polydimethyl siloxane (PDMS) while preparing the aqueous suspension of a polymeric resin to the HPPE fibres. One would have been motivated to do so as PDMS is well known lubricant, as is silicone oil.
Regarding Claim 2, where Applicant seeks that the composite elongated body according to claim 1, wherein the high performance polyethylene HPPE filaments are provided as a yarn, said yarn comprising at least two HPPE filaments having a tenacity of at least 0.6 N/tex; Applicant is directed to the rationale set forth above in Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 3, where Applicant seeks that the composite elongated body according to claim 1, wherein the polysiloxane is a polydimethylsiloxane; Applicant is directed to EP2424907B1 issued to Kolb et al teach ethylene based copolymers with additives such as polysiloxane type, e.g., silicone oil and polydimethyl siloxane [¶¶ 0108-0109 and 0116].
Regarding Claim 4, where Applicant seeks that the composite elongated body according to claim 1, wherein the polydimethylsiloxane is a non-reactive polydimethylsiloxane; Applicant is directed to EP2424907B1 issued to Kolb et al teach ethylene based copolymers with additives such as polysiloxane type, e.g., silicone oil and polydimethyl siloxane [¶¶ 0108-0109 and 0116].
Regarding Claim 5, where Applicant seeks a lengthy body comprising the composite elongated body according to claim 1; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0007, 0010, 0020 and 0032.
Regarding Claim 6, where Applicant seeks that the lengthy body according to claim 5 wherein the lengthy body is a strand, a cable, a cord, a rope, a belt, a strip, a hose or a tube; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0001-0005, 0032, 0035-0038, 0040 and 0047.
Regarding Claim 7, where Applicant seeks an article comprising at least one composite elongated body as defined in claim 1 and/or comprising at least one lengthy body, wherein the article is a synthetic chain, a sling, a net or a personal protection item; Applicant is directed to ¶ 0040.
Regarding Claim 8, where Applicant seeks a crane comprising a sheave and a rope comprising at least three composite elongated bodies according to claim 1; Applicant is directed to ¶ 0008, where the instant reference teaches that their invention has unexpectedly been found that the lengthy body manufactured according to the method of the present invention show good repeated bending over sheave performance, matching and even exceeding the number of cycles of cross-linked silicone rubber coated fibres while at least partly overcoming above mentioned problems. As the sheave and the rope are a part of a pulley system used on a crane, a skilled artisan would have found it obvious or predictable to use known prior art elements according to their established functions” and, as such, is not a patentable distinction. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1740 (2007).
Regarding Claim 9, where Applicant seeks a method of manufacturing a composite elongated body comprising the steps: a) providing a coating composition, wherein the coating composition comprises a thermoplastic ethylene copolymer;
a water; and a polysiloxane; b) providing at least two HPPE filaments, the filaments having a tenacity of at least 0.6 N/tex; c) applying the coating composition to the filaments to obtain coated filaments; and d) elevating the temperature of the coated filaments to obtain the composite elongated body, wherein the thermoplastic ethylene copolymer is a copolymer of ethylene and wherein said thermoplastic ethylene copolymer has a peak melting temperature in the range from 40 to 140° C., measured in accordance with ASTM E794-06; Applicant is directed to the rationale set forth in claim 1 above and ¶¶ 0026-0032.
Regarding Claim 10, where Applicant seeks that the method according to claim 9 of manufacturing a composite elongated body wherein in step d) elevating the temperature causes the coating composition to dry and the thermoplastic ethylene copolymer to melt; Applicant is directed to the rationale set forth in claim 1 above and ¶¶ 0026-0032.
Regarding Claim 11, where Applicant seeks a method of manufacturing a lengthy body comprising the step of assembling at least two composite elongated bodies as defined in claim 1 to form the lengthy body, preferably the lengthy body is a rope, such as a laid or braided rope; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0033 see also 0001-0005, 0032, 0035-0038, 0040 and 0047.
Regarding Claim 12, where Applicant seeks a method of manufacturing an article comprising the step of producing the article from the lengthy body as defined in claim 5 and/or the composite elongated body, preferably the article is a net, a synthetic chain or a personnel protection item; Applicant is directed to the rationale set forth for Claim 5 and ¶ 0040 of the instant reference.
Regarding Claim 13, where Applicant seeks a method of lifting and/or placement of an object comprising the steps a) providing a rope comprising at least three composite elongated bodies according to claim 1
b) connecting the rope to the object to be lifted; and
c) using the rope to lift and/or place the object; Applicant is directed to ¶ 0008, where the instant reference teaches that their invention has unexpectedly been found that the lengthy body manufactured according to the method of the present invention show good repeated bending over sheave performance, matching and even exceeding the number of cycles of cross-linked silicone rubber coated fibres while at least partly overcoming above mentioned problems. As the sheave and the rope are a part of a pulley system used on a crane which is used to “lift,” a skilled artisan would have found it obvious or predictable to use known prior art elements according to their established functions” and, as such, is not a patentable distinction. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1740 (2007).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPUB 20090165637A1 issued to Bosman et al.
Bosman et al. teaches a rope containing a plurality of strands comprising a mixture of high-performance polyethylene fibres and polytetrafluoroethylene fibres in a mass ratio of 70:30 to 98:2. The rope shows markedly improved service life performance in cyclic bend-over-sheave applications. The invention also relates to the use of said rope as a load-bearing member in bend-over-sheave applications. The rope contains a plurality of strands comprising a mixture of high-performance polyethylene fibres and polytetrafluoroethylene fibres in a mass ratio of 70:30 to 98:2, which rope further contains from about 2 to 20 mass % of silicone compounds (based on total rope mass). Such a rope shows a surprisingly high further improvement in bending fatigue life time, in combination with favorable strength properties, and resistance to abrasion. [abstract, ¶¶ 0034. 0037]. At ¶ 0023, the instant reference teaches that the monofilaments or tape-like fibres can be of varying titer, but typically have a titer in the range of 10 to several thousand dtex, preferably in the range of 100 to 2500 dtex, more preferably 200-2000 dtex. Multi-filament yarns contain a plurality of filaments having a titer typically in the 0.2-25 dtex range, preferably about 0.5-20 dtex.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Arti R Singh-Pandey whose telephone number is (571)272-1483. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-3:00 and 8:00-10:00.
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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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.
/Arti Singh-Pandey/
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1759
asp