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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 6 – 9 and 11 in the reply filed on 8/19/26 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim(s) 6 – 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2014118708 to Baratta, Simone hereinafter “Baratta”.
Baratta is directed to internally coating a hollow glass body such as a cosmetic or perfume bottle (1: 1 – 18, 20: 20 – 30).
Regarding claims 6 – 9 and 11, Baratta teaches a composition at Example 1, pages 20 – 21, comprising 65% glass frit, 15% pigment (CuO), 10% polycarboxylic resin and 10% water. The polycarboxylic resin is an organic resin made from wholly of partially polymerizing an organic acid such as (meth)acrylic acid. This is equivalent to an acrylic water-based varnish as the system is water based. Baratta teaches that the composition may have common additives that are used in preparing paints and coatings (page 11: 25 – 31). Therefore, further additives such as black pigment, catalysts (silane) would have been obvious to the skilled artisan based on the disclosure of Baratta.
In a first embodiment of the invention, the glass coating may be directly applied on the internal surface of the hollow glass body (17: 19 – 18).
Baratta is silent as to the claims amounts of materials (a) – (e). With regard to Applicant’s limitations regarding the concentrations of materials (a) – (e), it is the position of the Examiner that one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, would through routine and normal experimentation determine the optimization of these limitations to provide the best effective variable depending on the results desired. Because, Baratta already chooses a suitable coating composition, the Examiner asserts that the concentrations of materials (a) – (e) in the composition are art recognized result-effective variables. Thus, it would be obvious in the optimization process to adjust the concentrations of these materials to achieve the desired properties in the coating. In addition, merely modifying the process conditions such as temperature and concentration is not a patentable modification absent a showing of criticality, since the applicant does not show any unusual and/or unexpected results for the limitation stated (In re Aller, 220 Fo2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Note that the prior art provides the same effect desired by the Applicant, the formation of a paint composition for the internal painting of vitreous flasks.
Prior Art of Record
WO 2014118708 to Baratta, Simone.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER A. SALAMON whose telephone number is 571-270-3018. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 6PM.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
PAS 9/30/26
/PETER A SALAMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights