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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/25/2026.
Claim Interpretation
Based on the definition provided by the original disclosure, a “low-functionality polymer” is interpreted as a polymer comprised principally of C-C and C-H bonds and, therefore, lacks reactive functional groups such as, for example, carbonyl groups, hydroxyl groups, amines, amide or ester linkages.
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.
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.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin (Jin, Improvement of coating durability, interfacial adhesion and compressive strength of UHMWPE fiber/epoxy composites through plasma pre-treatment and polypyrrole coating, Composites Science and Technology, 128, 2016, pg. 169-175) in view of Vic (US 20080069969).
Regarding Claim 1. Jin teaches a method for the preparation of a polymer composite material comprising the steps of: (a) treating a polymer substrate with a primer (2.2); and (b) treating the product with an epoxy resin and curing the resulting mixture (2.4).
Jin teaches a polypyrrole primer which generates an amine functionality on the surface for epoxy bonding (Fig. 1A). Jin does not explicitly teach diazirine-polyamine; however, Vic teaches a diazirine-polyamine compound desirable for forming a polyamine functionalized polyolefin surface (abstract, [101-103]). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the primer of Jin to include a diazirine-polyamine compound, as taught in Vic, because it is a known compound for forming a polyamine functionalized polyolefin surface and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the functionalized surface for epoxy bonding of Jin with a compound as suggested by Vic.
Regarding Claim 2. Jin teaches the curing step is carried out in the presence of a hardener (curing agent, 2.4).
Regarding Claim 3. Jin teaches wherein the product of step (a) is sized with an epoxy resin prior to step (b) (injection of epoxy, i.e. a first portion of the epoxy applied is “size” and the remaining portion of the epoxy is the resin of step b).
Regarding Claims 4-6. Jin teaches ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE, 2.2).
Regarding Claim 7, Vic teaches the primer is derived from a polyamine which is an oligomeric or polymeric compound containing at least 3 repeat units, where each repeat unit is a molecular fragment defined by 1 or more nitrogen atoms covalently bonded to 1 or more carbon atoms ([0038-0039]).
Regarding Claim 8, Vic teaches the primer is derived from diazirine-containing haloaromatics ([0024-0025]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Li (Li, Surface modification of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene fibers via sequential photo induced graft polymerization, Applied Surface Science, 257, 2011, pg. 7600-7608) teaches methacrylic acid and acryl amide grafted UHMWPE fibers in an epoxy matrix.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABATHA L PENNY whose telephone number is (571)270-5512. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 5712721418. 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.
/TABATHA L PENNY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights