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 .
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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-12, 14-19, and 22-23 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art of record does not teach an epoxy/hardener system having the limitations recited in claim 1 in combination with the enthalpy of reaction recited in claim 5.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pre-grant Publication 2004/0132867 to Shibahara et al. cited in the Information Disclosure Statement filed 20 March 2024 (herein Shibahara) in view of U.S. Pre-grant Publication 2024/0166816 to Ikeuchi et al. (herein Ikeuchi).
Regarding claim 1, Shibahara teaches a transparent composite composition comprising an epoxy resin and a glass filler (abstract) wherein the epoxy resin comprises an epoxy resin having a refractive index lower than the refractive index of the glass filler and an epoxy resin having a refractive index higher than the refractive index of the glass filler (paragraph 0019). Shibahara teaches that at least one epoxy resin is an alicyclic epoxy resin (paragraph 0022) and the curing agent used in the composition is an acid anhydride curing agent (paragraph 0043). Shibahara is silent as to the non-aromatic content of the epoxy resin; however, Shibahara teaches that the proportion of the epoxy resins having differing refractive indices can be adjusted according to the refractive index of the glass filler (paragraph 0041) thereby rendering the claimed range obvious through routine optimization. See MPEP 2144.05(II). Shibahara teaches that a solvent can be added to the composition (paragraph 0056). Shibahara also teaches that the glass filler is a glass fiber (paragraph 0050).
Shibahara is silent as to the viscosity and the pot life of the composition.
Regarding the viscosity, Ikeuchi teaches a thermosetting resin composition comprising a reaction product of an epoxy resin and a resin modifier and an epoxy curing agent (abstract). Ikeuchi teaches that a solvent is used to adjust the viscosity of the composition (paragraph 0042) and the viscosity of the composition affects the workability (paragraph 0052).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the amount of solvent in the composition to optimize the workability and therefore the viscosity of the composition thereby rendering the claimed viscosity obvious. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding the pot life of the composition, Ikeuchi teaches that the pot life of the thermosetting composition at 23°C is 8 hours or more (paragraph 0056).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the composition of Shibahara to have the pot life taught by Ikeuchi because it would increase the workability of the composition (paragraph 0011).
Regarding claim 2, Shibahara and Ikeuchi teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shibahara teaches that the composition can further include one or more curing promoters (paragraph 0045).
Regarding claim 3, Shibahara and Ikeuchi teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shibahara teaches that the composition can include several additives (paragraph 0055).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Shibahara and Ikeuchi teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shibahara teaches that the composition can be used to impregnate glass cloth or a nonwoven glass fiber followed by curing (paragraph 0056). Examiner notes that the structure prior to curing meets the limitations of being a prepreg.
Regarding claim 8, Shibahara and Ikeuchi teach all the limitations of claim 7 as discussed above.
Shibahara teaches that the glass filler has a refractive index of 1.50 to 1.57 (paragraph 0049) and that the epoxy resin composition and glass filler has a difference in refractive index of less than 0.01 (paragraph 0014). Combining these two gives a refractive index of the product as a whole that overlaps the claimed range. It has been held that obviousness exists where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding claim 9, Shibahara and Ikeuchi teach all the limitations of claim 7 as discussed above.
Shibahara teaches that the epoxy resin has, after curing, a glass transition temperature of not lower than 150°C (paragraph 0011).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Shibahara and Ikeuchi teach all the limitations of claim 7 as discussed above.
Shibahara is silent as to the cured product having the claimed properties; however, the cured product of Shibahara is made using substantially similar materials as the claimed invention. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the cured product of Shibahara to have substantially similar properties.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibahara and Ikeuchi as applied above and in further view of U.S. Pre-grant Publication 2021/0002415 to Zheng et al. (herein Zheng).
Regarding claim 4, Shibahara and Ikeuchi teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shibahara is silent as to the initial curing temperature of the epoxy resin.
Zheng teaches an epoxy-based curable composition (abstract) that cures at less than 110°C (paragraph 0090).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the epoxy composition of Shibahara to have the curing temperature taught by Zheng because it prevents damage to underlying substrates or components (paragraph 0090).
Claim(s) 12, 14-19, and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibahara.
Regarding claims 12 and 14, Shibahara teaches a transparent composite composition comprising an epoxy resin and a glass filler (abstract) wherein the epoxy resin comprises an epoxy resin having a refractive index lower than the refractive index of the glass filler and an epoxy resin having a refractive index higher than the refractive index of the glass filler (paragraph 0019). Shibahara teaches that at least one epoxy resin is an alicyclic epoxy resin (paragraph 0022) and the curing agent used in the composition is an acid anhydride curing agent (paragraph 0043). Shibahara is silent as to the non-aromatic content of the epoxy resin; however, Shibahara teaches that the proportion of the epoxy resins having differing refractive indices can be adjusted according to the refractive index of the glass filler (paragraph 0041) thereby rendering the claimed range obvious through routine optimization. See MPEP 2144.05(II). Shibahara teaches that a solvent can be added to the composition (paragraph 0056). Shibahara also teaches that the glass filler is a glass fiber (paragraph 0050). Shibahara teaches that the composition can be used to impregnate glass cloth or a nonwoven glass fiber followed by curing (paragraph 0056). Shibahara teaches that the glass filler has a refractive index of 1.50 to 1.57 (paragraph 0049) and that the epoxy resin composition and glass filler has a difference in refractive index of less than 0.01 (paragraph 0014).
Regarding claim 15, Shibahara teaches all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above.
Shibahara teaches that the composition can include several additives (paragraph 0055).
Regarding claims 16 and 19, Shibahara teaches all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above.
Shibahara is silent as to the cured product having the claimed properties; however, the cured product of Shibahara is made using substantially similar materials as the claimed invention. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the cured product of Shibahara to have substantially similar properties.
Regarding claim 17, Shibahara teaches all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above.
Shibahara teaches that the cured product has a light transmissivity at 550 nm of not less than 80% (paragraph 0012). Shibahara also teaches that the cured product has a thickness of 50 to 2,000 µm (paragraph 0057). It has been held that obviousness exists where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding claims 18 and 23, Shibahara teaches all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above.
Shibahara teaches that the epoxy resin has, after curing, a glass transition temperature of not lower than 150°C (paragraph 0011). Examiner notes that the range taught by Shibahara is close to the range recited in instant claim 23. It has been held that obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding claim 22, Shibahara teaches all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above.
Shibahara is silent as to the cured product containing a plurality of cured sheets; however, adding layers of the cured product amounts to a duplication of parts. Therefore, the claimed limitation is rendered obvious. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY M DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6957. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4:30, off 2nd Friday.
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, Maria V Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
/ZACHARY M DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783