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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 19-31, in the reply filed on 1/30/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 32-41 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. As Applicant did not traverse the restriction requirement, it is hereby deemed proper and made FINAL.
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 19-31 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.
Claim 19 recites “A tie sublayer of a non-stick coating on a metal support, comprising…”. The metes and bounds of this claim are not clear. The claim is purportedly to a tie sublayer, but a sublayer is not a sublayer without another layer on top of it. Thus, it is unclear whether a layer having the claimed composition must also have a non-stick coating associated with it. For purposes of examination, this is presumed to be the case. Dependent claims 20-31 depend from claim 19 and are indefinite for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 19-25, 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by, or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (CN 106280975).
Regarding claims 19-23, 27, and 29, He teaches a primer basecoat under a non-stick coating (pp. 1-2). The primer contains 20-30 parts of a polymer resin, 1-3 parts of a pigment, 15-20 parts of PEEK, 3-5 parts of packing (corresponding to inorganic filler), 0.5-1 part of an auxiliary agent, and 40-50 parts of a solvent (pp. 1-2). The polymer resin is a mix of PES and PAI in a ratio of 1:0.1 to 1:1.5 (p. 2). Thus, the primer contains about 8-27 parts PES and 2-18 parts PAI. Since all of the solvent is expected to substantially evaporate during curing at 380°C-400°C (p. 3), the actual composition of the resulting coating without solvent would be, compared to the claimed composition: (a) 22%-58% PEEK & 3%-36% PAI for a total of 25%-94%, (b) 15%-56% PES, (c) 4%-16% packing filler, and (d) 0% fluorocarbon or acrylic resin. The ratio of PEEK:PAI covers the range 0.6-19.3. The prior art ranges overlap the claimed ranges, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
In the alternative, He teaches the following basecoat examples, with corresponding ratios:
Ex. 1 (pp. 3-4)
Ex. 2 (p. 5)
Ex. 3 (pp. 6-7)
PEEK
15
38%
18
36%
20
34%
PAI
5
13%
10
20%
15
25%
PEEK+PAI
51%
56%
59%
PEEK:PAI
2.9:1
1.8:1
1.36:1
PES
15
38%
15
30%
15
25%
Filler
4
8%
6
8%
8
8%
These values lie within the claimed ranges, thereby anticipating them.
Regarding claims 24-25, He teaches the filler is silicon carbide (p. 4).
Regarding claim 28, He teaches the pigment includes carbon black (p. 8).
Regarding claim 30, He teaches the auxiliary agent is an emulsifier (p. 2), which is a type of surfactant.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 19-25, 27, and 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mennella et al. (WO 2019/096800).
Regarding claims 19-25, Mennella discloses a primer layer for a steel substrate (¶ 179) comprising 10 parts PEEK, 7.5 parts PES, 2.5 parts PAI, 5 parts 30C965, 3.5 parts DisperByk, 1 part Airex 931, and 0.5 part Nubirox 106 (see Table 1, Ex. 1). The composition for the primer layer also includes solvents S-1 and S-2 which are to be evaporated (¶ 179). Thus, after accounting for the solvent, the overall composition of the primer layer is (a) 33.3% PEEK and 8.33% PAI for a PEEK:PAI ratio of 4:1, (b) 25% PES, (c), 16.67% 30C965 (pigment filler) and 1.67% Nubirox (pigment), and (d) 0% fluorocarbon or acrylic resin.
Regarding claims 24-25 and 27, 30C965 is a pigment (¶ 177). Mennella also discloses inclusion of a pigment such as titanium dioxide (¶ 72) and fillers including silicon carbides (¶ 70).
Regarding claim 29, the composition for the primer layer presumably contains small amounts of unevaporated solvents S-1 and S-2 (¶ 178), absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 30, the layer includes wetting and dispersing additive Disperbyk-161 (¶ 178), which is considered a surfactant.
Regarding claim 31, Airex 931 is an anti-foaming agent (¶ 177).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 19-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi et al. (CN 105001780).
Regarding claims 19-23 and 26, Shi teaches a non-stick coating having a primer coating (¶ 31), which corresponds to the claimed tie sublayer, comprising 5%-15% polyethersulfone (PES), 0%-10% polyetheretherketone (PEEK), 0%-5% polyamide-imide (PAI), 2%-6% perfluoroethylene propylene (FEP), 2%-20% pigment filler, 0%-10% additive, and 50%-70% deionized water (¶ 32). Since the water is dried (¶ 34), the corresponding weight ratios of the primer coating are: 5%-52% PES, 0-34% PEEK, 0%-21% PAI, 2%-26% FEP, 3%-54% pigment and filler, and 0%-34% additive. Compared to the composition of claim 19, (a) is PEEK and PAI accounting for 0%-55% of the primer, (b) is Pes accounting for 5%-52% of the primer, (c) is the pigment and filler accounting for 3%-54% of the primer, and (d) is FEP accounting for 2%-26% of the primer. These ranges overlap the claimed ranges, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claims 24-25 and 27-28, Shi teaches the pigment filler can be silicon carbide (¶ 119). Shi also teaches the use of pigments such as iron oxide and titanium white, which is TiO2 (¶ 38).
Regarding claim 29, Shi teaches the primer coating includes additives (¶ 32), which may be an organic solvent (¶ 91).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIAOBEI WANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5705. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM EST.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
/XIAOBEI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights