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
Applicant is advised that should claim 3 be found allowable, claim 6 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim(s) 1–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsui (WO 2021/084954) in view of Tetsui (US 2020/0332048 A1) “Tetsui II,”and Watanabe (US 2020/0239972 A1). The Examiner relies upon the US version (US 2024/0109999 A1) of the WO document in this rejection.
Tetsui teaches a urethane resin composition that provides excellent hand feeling. Tetsui abstract. The urethane resin may be used in the production of artificial leather by its application to a substrate layer prior to the resin’s complete cure. Id. ¶¶ 55–58. The artificial leather may further comprise a skin layer, wherein the urethane resin acts as an adhesive between the skin and substrate layers. See id. ¶¶ 57–58. The urethane resin composition may include a nonionic group imparted by an oxyethylene structure-containing compound and water. Id. abstract, ¶¶ 18–19. The ratio between the urethane resin and water is the range of 50/50 to 80/20. Id. ¶ 8.
Tetsui fails to teach a flow start temperature of 100oC or above for the urethane resin.
Tetsui II teaches an aqueous resin composition that includes a urethane resin with a flow starting temperature of 50–155oC, wherein the resin exhibits excellent adhesiveness and resistance to moist heat without the need of a crosslinking agent. Tetsui abstract. The resin may be used in the production of synthetic leather. Id. ¶¶ 8, 80–82.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the urethane resin of Tetsui to have a flow start temperature of 100oC or above based upon the teachings of Tetsui motivated by the desire to form a resin with excellent adhesiveness and moist heat resistance.
Tetsui fails to teach the addition of a powder to the polyurethane resin composition.
Watanabe teaches a coating agent for leather comprising an aqueous urethane resin and matting agent, wherein the coating agent provides the leather excellent wear resistance and antifouling properties. Watanabe abstract. Examples of the matting agent include silica and silicone powders. Id. ¶¶ 40–42.
It would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan to have added the silica or silicone powder matting agent of Watanabe to the urethane resin of Tetsui motivated by the desire to provide the resin with excellent wear resistance and antifouling properties.
Watanabe fails to teach the bulk density of the silica or silicone matting powder. Although Watanabe does not explicitly teach the claimed feature of a powder bulk density of 400g/L or less, it is reasonable to presume that the claimed density is inherent to Watanabe. Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials (i.e. silica and silicone powder). The burden is upon Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed property of a powder bulk density of 400g/L or less would obviously have been present one the Watanabe product is provided. Note In re Best, 195 USPQ at 433, footnote (CCPA 1977) as to the providing of this rejection made above under 35 USC 102. Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though rejection is based on Section 103 instead of Section 102. In re Skoner, 517 F.2d 947 (CCPA 1975).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D MATZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-5732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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.
/MATTHEW D MATZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786