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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 19 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on December 29, 2025.
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, 2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over WO 2020/039704 to Yoshikawa, with US Pub. No. 2021/0164130 cited as the English equivalent, in view of USPN 4,576,840 to Murata
Regarding claims 1, 2, and 4, Yoshikawa teach an acrylic fiber for artificial hair including an acrylic copolymer, having a fiber cross section including 2 to 4 T-shaped protrusions extending radially from a central portion, wherein the torsional rigidity of the acrylic fiber is 0.30 to 2.0 mg·cm2 (Yoshikawa, Abstract). Yoshikawa teaches various shapes at paragraph 0015 including Fig. 3, which appears to be within the scope of the claimed anchor-like-Y-shape (see Applicants’ specification at paragraph 0013 and Fig. 1). Yoshikawa teaches that the single fiber fineness may be 20 dtex or more and 95 dtex or less (Id., paragraph 0047).
Yoshikawa does not appear to teach the claimed dry-heat shrinkage ratio. However, Yoshikawa teaches that the acrylic copolymer may contain less than 95% by weight of acrylonitrile and more than 5% by weight of other monomers, including vinyl chloride and/or vinylidene chloride and sulfonic acid group-containing vinyl monomers (Yoshikawa, paragraphs 0025-0027). Yoshikawa teaches wet spinning a spinning solution by dissolving the acrylic polymer in an organic solvent that may contain a small amount of water (Id., paragraph 0030), wherein the wet spinning includes at least a coagulation process, a water washing process, and a drying process, and a bath drawing process (Id., paragraph 0036). Yoshikawa teaches that the fibers are drawn in the bath drawing process (Id., paragraph 0041). Yoshikawa teaches that the fibers are dried and drawn, and may be further drawn in a secondary drawing (Id., paragraph 0045). Applicants’ specification teaches a similar manner of forming the claimed acrylic fibers comprising substantially similar or identical compositions and manners of forming the acrylic fibers (see Applicants’ specification at paragraphs 0038, 0041-0054). Yoshikawa teaches that the fiber may be relaxed in the thermal relaxation process (Id., paragraph 0046). It is reasonable for one of ordinary skill to expect that the fibers are not required to be relaxed.
Additionally, Murata teaches a pile composition comprising as pile fibers 20 to 98% by weight of shrinkable fibers which are at least 15% in shrinkage (Murata, Abstract). Murata teaches that the shrinkable fibers are preferably acrylic synthetic fibers, which comprise at least 30% by weight acrylonitrile with at least one monoolefin monomer such as vinyl chloride (Id., column 3 lines 15-40). Murata does not require a relaxation treatment (Id., Examples 1-5, claims 1-5). Murata teaches an exemplary dry heat shrinkage of 37.8% when treated at 130ºC for 30 minutes (Id., Example 1). Murata teaches that the pile composition is outstanding in appearance, hand and draping property (Id., column 1 lines 42-44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the acrylic fiber of Yoshikawa, wherein the fiber comprises a dry-heat shrinkage rate, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Murata, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional acrylic fiber having the desired properties including appearance and hand, suitable for the intended application.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art combination does not appear to specifically teach the claimed hollow ratio. However, Yoshikawa teaches a substantially similar fiber structure shape and single fiber fineness as claimed. Additionally, Yoshikawa teaches at Fig. 3 a shape identical to Applicants’ Fig. 1. Therefore, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill to expect that the claimed hollow ratio is inherent to the invention of the prior art combination. Products of identical structure cannot have mutually exclusive properties. The burden is on Applicants to prove otherwise.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yoshikawa in view of Murata, as applied to claims 1, 2, and 4 above, and further in view of JP 2008-285772 to Toshiyuki.
Regarding claim 4, in the event it is shown that the prior art does not establish the claimed hollow ratio, Toshiyuki teaches a similar artificial hair obtained by forming the cross-sectional shape of an artificial hair fiber having a hollow part with a percentage of hollowness of 10-50% (Toshiyuki, Abstract). Toshiyuki teaches that the artificial hair has at least one cross-sectional shape selected from the group consisting of oval, cross-circular, cocoon, potbelly, dogbone, ribbon, 3-8 lobe, and star (Id., paragraph 0011). Toshiyuki teaches that as a result of the fiber form, the artificial hair has thermal resistance and fiber physical properties such as strong elongation, curl characteristics, excellent color clearness, soft touch feeling, bulky properties, lightweight feeling, and luster feeling approximate to human hair (Id., Abstract, paragraphs 0005, 0009, 0064).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the artificial fiber of the prior art combination, wherein the fiber comprises a hollow ratio, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Toshiyuki, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional artificial fiber having the desired properties including lightweight feeling and bulkiness, suitable for the intended application.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yoshikawa in view of Murata, as applied to claims 1, 2, and 4 above, and further in view of JP 2008-285772 to Toshiyuki.
Regarding claim 4, in the event it is shown that the prior art combination does not establish the claimed hollow ratio, Toshiyuki teaches a similar artificial hair obtained by forming the cross-sectional shape of an artificial hair fiber having a hollow part with a percentage of hollowness of 10-50% (Toshiyuki, Abstract). Toshiyuki teaches that as a result of the fiber form, the artificial hair has thermal resistance and fiber physical properties such as strong elongation, curl characteristics, excellent color clearness, soft touch feeling, bulky properties, lightweight feeling, and luster feeling approximate to human hair (Id., Abstract, paragraphs 0005, 0009, 0064). Toshiyuki teaches that the artificial hair has at least one cross-sectional shape selected from the group consisting of oval, cross-circular, cocoon, potbelly, dogbone, ribbon, 3-8 lobe, and star (Id., paragraph 0011).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the artificial fiber of the prior art combination, wherein the fiber comprises a hollow ratio, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Toshiyuki, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional artificial fiber having the desired properties including lightweight feeling and bulkiness, suitable for the intended application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot based on the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER Y CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-6730. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/PETER Y CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights