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 § 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 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because it claims a method of using without reciting any active, positive steps.
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 9-10 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claims 9-10 claim a method of using without reciting any active, positive steps.
Claims 1-10 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. The claimed “Shore hardness” is indefinite because the method for determining the property is not claimed. Furthermore, the instant specification does not disclose a complete testing method.
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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. (CN 111548612A) in view of Huang et al. (CN 111732819).
Regarding claims 1 and 3-7: Deng et al. teach a polyester resin composition comprising 49 parts of a PCT resin, 30 parts of glass fiber, 3 parts of KH-R163, which is a polyester-ether elastomer comprising a polyester hard segment and a polyether soft segment, has a shore hardness of 63 D, a melting point of 212°C, and an intrinsic viscosity of 0.75 dL/g, and the additives 3 parts MBS, 0.5 parts of a dispersing agent, 0.3 parts of a nucleating agent, and 0.5 parts of an antioxidant (4.3 parts additives in total).
Deng et al. fail to teach a white pigment.
However, Huang et al. teach adding 25 parts of the white pigment titanium dioxide to an analogous composition [0058; Example; Tables].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed composition to add 25 parts of titanium dioxide as taught by Huang et al. to the composition of Deng et al. to produce a white composition.
Regarding claim 2: Deng et al. teach 20-65 parts by weight of PCT resin and 20 to 60 parts by weight of glass fiber [0021-0023].
The subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since it has been held that choosing the overlapping portion, of the range taught in the prior art and the range claimed by the applicant, has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness, see In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549, In re Geisler 43 USPQ2d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (CCPA 1976) and MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 8: Deng et al. teach a preparation method of mixing the components, conducting melt extrusion and granulation to obtain the polyester resin composition [0056; Examples].
Relevant Art
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT/CN2022/117708 provides evidence that KH-R163 is a polyester-ether elastomer comprising a polyester hard segment and a polyether soft segment, has a shore hardness of 63 D, a melting point of 212°C, and an intrinsic viscosity of 0.75 dL/g (page 4).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN USELDING whose telephone number is (571)270-5463. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am to 6:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN E USELDING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights