DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 claims 1-5 in the reply filed on 5 Aug. 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayashi et al. US 2015/0337098 (hereafter Hayashi).
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi teaches a porous membrane (¶1) comprising polytetrafluoroethylene as a main component (¶7-10), wherein a melting curve obtained in a first run of differential scanning calorimetry at a rate of temperature increase of 10°C/min has an endothermic peak in a range of 300°C to 360°C (¶9, where the PTFE membrane of Hayashi would be expected to have the properties of the melting curve because the structure of the membrane is the same as the prior art “polytetrafluoroethylene as a main component”), and a difference between an onset temperature and an endset temperature of the endothermic peak is 20°c or less (¶9, where the PTFE membrane of Hayashi would be expected to have the properties of the onset and endset because the structure of the membrane is the same as the prior art “polytetrafluoroethylene as a main component”).
Regarding claim 2, Hayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi further teaches wherein the difference between the onset temperature and the endset temperature of the endothermic peak is 15°C or less (¶9, where the PTFE membrane of Hayashi would be expected to have the properties of the onset and endset because the structure of the membrane is the same as the prior art “polytetrafluoroethylene as a main component”).
Regarding claim 3, Hayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi further teaches wherein a porosity of the porous membrane is 40% to 90% (¶59, 80%).
Regarding claim 4, Hayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi further teaches wherein a mean flow pore size in a pore-size distribution of the porous membrane is 69 nm to 107 nm (¶60, 74 nm).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hayashi et al. US 2015/0079392 (hereafter ‘392).
Regarding claim 5, Hayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Hayashi does not teach wherein a pore size ratio in a pore-size distribution of the porous membrane is 17% to 49%.
‘392 teaches a porous membrane with polytetrafluoroethylene as a main component (¶2) where the pore size ratio in a pore size distribution affects fractionation performance (¶6).
MPEP 2144.05 II states that where a variable is known to affect a result, a prima facie case of obviousness exists to optimize the variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the a pore size ratio in a pore-size distribution of the porous membrane (¶7-10), such as to 17% to 49%, as a prima facie case of obviousness in order to affect the fractionation performance (‘ 392 ¶6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN HOBSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9914. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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 Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
/STEPHEN HOBSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights