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 Objections
Claim 1, 9, 10, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “the first polyalkylene terephthalate”. The claim should instead read “the first polyalkylene terephthalate polymer”.
Claim 9, 10, and 11 recites “the high heat polymer”. The claims should instead read “the high heat polycarbonate”.
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 1-15 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.
The term “high heat” in claim 1, 2, 10, 11 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high heat” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The polycarbonate is rendered indefinite.
Claim 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 recites the limitation "the polyalkylene terephthalate" in claim 2, line 4, claim 4, line 4, claim 5, line 4, claim 6, line 2, claim 7, line 2, and claim 8, line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3, 9, 12, 13, 14, and 15 are rejected for being dependent on claim 1.
Claim Analysis
Summary of Claim 1:
A thermoplastic composition comprising:
a. from about 0.01 wt. % to about 90 wt. % of a polyalkylene terephthalate component, wherein the polyalkylene terephthalate component comprises at least a first and a second polyalkylene terephthalate polymer, wherein the first polyalkylene terephthalate has a molecular weight of from about 80,000 g/mol to about 300,000 g/mol as measured by gel permeation chromatography with polystyrene standards;
b. from about greater than 0 wt. % to about 50 wt. % of a glass fiber; and
c. from about 5 wt.% to about 45 wt.% of a high heat polycarbonate, wherein the high heat polycarbonate has a glass transition temperature greater than the glass transition temperature of a bisphenol A polycarbonate homopolymer;
wherein the thermoplastic composition exhibits laser transmission between 20% and 80% of incident laser light at a wavelength of 980 nm at 1 millimeter thickness when measured pursuant to DVS Regulation 2243, wherein the combined weight percent value of all components does not exceed 100 wt.%, and all weight percent values are based on the total weight of the composition.
Claim Interpretation
The recitation of “the high heat polycarbonate has a glass transition temperature greater than the glass transition temperature of a bisphenol A polycarbonate homopolymer” is interpreted as a high heat polycarbonate having a glass transition temperature of 155°C or higher in view of instant specification [0080].
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.
Claims 1-7 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farrel et al. (WO 2017187428 as listed on IDS dated April 12, 2024).
Regarding claim 1, Farrel et al. teach a composition of Example 1 comprising 50.69 wt% of a poly(1,4-butylene terephthalate) having a molecular weight of 66,000 g/mol, 30 wt% of glass fiber, and 19 wt% of a polycarbonate having a glass transition temperature of 226°C (Table 1 and 3), thereby lying within the claimed range of a polyalkylene terephthalate component, glass fiber, and polycarbonate.
Farrel et al. do not teach the first polyalkylene terephthalate having a molecular weight as recited by the instant claim.
However, Farrel et al. broadly teach the polyester component of the thermoplastic composition may comprise combinations thereof (claim 1). Furthermore, Farrel et al. teach a poly(1,4-butylene terephthalate) having a molecular weight of 115,000 g/mol (Table 1), thereby lying within the claimed range of the first polyalkylene terephthalate having a molecular weight of from about 80,000 g/mol to 300,000 g/mol. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the first polyalklene terephthalate as taught by Farrel et al.
Farrel et al. is silent on the laser transmission of the thermoplastic composition as recited in the instant claim.
In view of the substantially identical thermoplastic composition of Farrel et al., the thermoplastic composition of Farrel et al. will possess the claimed properties because laser transmission is an inherent property. Because the PTO does not have proper means to conduct experiments, the burden of proof is now shifted to Applicant to show otherwise. (See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977); In re Fitzgerald, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980).)
Regarding claims 2-5, Farrel et al. is silent on the thermoplastic composition having the warpage, heat deflection temperature, crystallinity, and melting enthalpy as recited in the instant claim.
In view of the substantially identical thermoplastic composition of Farrel et al., the thermoplastic composition of Farrel et al. will possess the claimed properties because warpage, heat deflection temperature, crystallinity, and melting enthalpy are inherent properties. Because the PTO does not have proper means to conduct experiments, the burden of proof is now shifted to Applicant to show otherwise. (See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977); In re Fitzgerald, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980).)
Regarding claim 6, Farrel et al. disclose the thermoplastic composition of Example 1 comprises polybutylene terephthalate.
Farrel et al. is silent on if the polybutylene terephthalate used in Example 1 is a homopolymer or a copolymer.
However, Farrel et al. broadly teach the thermoplastic composition comprises a poly(butylene terephthalate) homopolymer or copolymer (claim 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add a polybutylene terephthalate homopolymer or copolymer as broadly taught by Farrel et al.
Regarding claim 7, Farrel et al. disclose the thermoplastic composition of Example 1 comprises polybutylene terephthalate (Table 1 and 3), thereby reading on the instant claim.
Regarding claim 9, Farrel et al. disclose the thermoplastic composition of Example 1 comprises a polycarbonate 46 mol% of PPPBP, an abbreviation for 2-phenyl-3,3'-bis(4- hydroxy phenyl)phthalimidine and 52% isophthalate-terephthalate ester., thereby reading on the high heat polycarbonate comprising phenyl-3,3'-bis(4- hydroxy phenyl)phthalimidine units.
Farrel et al. is silent on if the high heat polycarbonate comprises bisphenol A carbonate units.
However, Farrel et al. broadly teach the thermoplastic composition comprises a polycarbonate comprising carbonate units of the formula
PNG
media_image1.png
58
142
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein R1 may be a bisphenol A divalent groups (claim 1), thereby reading on a bisphenol A carbonate unit as recited in the instant claim. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add a bisphenol A carbonate unit to the polycarbonate as broadly taught by Farrel et al.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Farrel et al. disclose the thermoplastic composition of Example 1 comprises a high heat polycarbonate comprising 46 mol% of PPPBP, an abbreviation for 2-phenyl-3,3'-bis(4- hydroxy phenyl)phthalimidine, thereby lying within the claimed range of the high heat carbonate comprising phenyl-3,3’-bis(4-hydroxyphenyl) phthalimidine carbonate units as recited in the instant claims.
Regarding claim 12, Farrel et al. disclose the thermoplastic composition of Example 1 comprises 30 wt% of glass fiber, thereby lying within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 13, Farrel et al. disclose the thermoplastic composition of Example 1 comprises PETS (pentaerythritol tetrastearate) as a mold release agent, AO1010 as an antioxidant (see Table 1 and [0045]), thereby reading on the instant claim wherein the thermoplastic composition further comprises at least one additional additive.
Regarding claim 14 and 15, Farrel et al. teach the thermoplastic composition is used to form a laser molded article (claim 17), thereby reading on the instant claims.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farrel et al. (WO 2017187428 as listed on IDS dated April 12, 2024) in view of Grieshaber et al. (US 20170037243).
The thermoplastic composition of claim 1 is incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding claim 8, Farrel et al. is silent on if the polybutylene terephthalate used in the thermoplastic composition is post-consumer or post-industrial as recited in the instant claim.
Grieshaber et al. teach an article comprising a thermoplastic composition comprising a polycarbonate and a polyester that is polybutylene terephthalate (claim 5). Grieshaber et al. further teach the polyester may be post-consumer [0087]. Grieshaber et al. offer the motivation that the compositions are suitable for high heat applications [0007]. Farrel et al. is also concerned with thermoplastic compositions comprising polycarbonates and polyesters for high heat applications [0013]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the post-consumer polybutylene terephthalate of Grieshaber et al. to the thermoplastic composition of Farrel et al. since both are related to thermoplastic compositions for high heat applications.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREA WU whose telephone number is (571)272-0342. The examiner can normally be reached M F 8 - 5.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at (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 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.
/ANDREA WU/Examiner, Art Unit 1763
/JOSEPH S DEL SOLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights