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 .
Applicant’s amendment and accompanying remarks filed May 27, 2026 are acknowledged.
Examiner acknowledges amended claims 1, 6 and 9-13.
Examiner acknowledges cancelled claims 2-5 and 8.
Examiner acknowledges newly added claims 17-18.
The rejection of claims 1, 6, 8-10 and 12-16 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2016/0068428 is overcome by Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 1-3 and 6-10 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kishimoto et al., JP 2000-159544 is overcome by Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 1-2 and 4-7 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as being anticipated by Dejneka et al. U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2019/0127265 is overcome by Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakagawa, JPH025620 as evidenced by Kishimoto et al., JP 2000-159544.
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.
Claims 1, 6-7 and 9-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Nakamura et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2020/0140320.
Regarding claims 1, 9-11 and 17-18, Nakamuara discloses in Example 2, Table 1 57.33 mol% of SiO2; 12.45 mol% Al2O3; and 27.92 mol% MgO. Example 6, Table 1 discloses 57.35 mol% SiO2; 14.96 mol% Al2O3; and 27.52 mol% MgO. Paragraph 0001 discloses a glass composition for glass fibers. Example 2 discloses a Young’s modulus of 101.8 GPa. Example 6 discloses a Young’s modulus of 101.9 GPa. Examples 2 and 6 in Table do not include rare earth compounds. See also reference claims 1-2.
Nakamura teaches the claimed invention but fails to teach a weight reduction rate in acid resistance by a method in accordance with JOGIS J06-1999 is 40% by weight or less. It is reasonable to presume that a weight reduction rate in acid resistance by a method in accordance with JOGIS J06-1999 is 40% by weight or less is inherent to Nakamuara. Said presumption is based upon Nakamura’s disclosure of a glass composition for a glass fiber wherein the glass composition includes mol% of SiO2; 12.45 mol% Al2O3; and 27.92 mol% MgO having an elastic modulus of 101.8 GPa. Burden is upon Applicant to prove otherwise. Fitzgerald, In re, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claims 6-7, reference claim 7 discloses ZrO2 present in the amount of 0.1 mol%.
Regarding claim 12, paragraph 0001 discloses a glass fiber such as a glass fiber nonwoven fabric.
Regarding claim 13, paragraph 0001 discloses a glass fiber product such as rubber reinforcing cord.
Regarding claim 14, Nakamura discloses a glass fiber having a glass composition which includes mol% of SiO2; 12.45 mol% Al2O3; and 27.92 mol% MgO having an elastic modulus of 101.8 GPa. Nakamura discloses the same limitations as required by Applicant’s claimed “pipe”. Applicant’s preamble, "pipe" does not limit the structure of the claimed invention. See MPEP 2111.02.
Regarding claim 15, paragraph 0001 discloses a glass fiber product such as rubber reinforcing cord. Applicant’s claim 15 is directed to a reinforcing material.
Regarding claim 16, Nakamura discloses a glass fiber having a glass composition which includes mol% of SiO2; 12.45 mol% Al2O3; and 27.92 mol% MgO having an elastic modulus of 101.8 GPa. Nakamura discloses the same limitations as required by Applicant’s claimed “high voltage power transmission line”. Applicant’s preamble, "high voltage power transmission line” does not limit the structure of the claimed invention. See MPEP 2111.02.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the present claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMIE S THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1530. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:30 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.
/CAMIE S THOMPSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights