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 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 1-2, 5-7, 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillemette et al. (US 2015/0298380 A1) [Guillemette ‘380] in view of Riise et al. (US 2005/0179153 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Guillemette ‘380 teaches a multi-component structure comprising a multicomponent substrate having a plurality of vertical layers, including at least one first layer and at least one second layer.
PNG
media_image1.png
498
601
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Guillemette ‘380 teaches the first layer comprises a first polymer and the at least one second layer comprises a second polymer (Paragraph 0001, 0025, 0032). Guillemette ‘380 teaches the substrate can have any necessary number of layers until the desired profile is formed; therefore, there is a preset ratio between the first and second material volume ratio. (Paragraph 0025).
Guillemette ‘380 teaches at least one of the second layers includes a plurality of horizontal layers. (Fig. 6; Paragraph 0025). Guillemette ‘380 teaches the layers, horizontal and vertical, can include reinforcement filler. (Claim 8 of Guillemette ‘380). Therefore, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the horizontal layer can alternate polymer matrix layers and fiber reinforcement layers. Guillemette ‘380 teaches fibers can be oriented and aligned either parallel or perpendicular to the extrusion axis. (Paragraph 0030). Therefore, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the fibers to extend through a length of the multi-component structure.
Guillemtte ‘380 does not require the multicomponent to be electrically conductive, and states the component can inhibit electrical current, and can include various non-conductive additives, such as vegetable fibers or wood fibers. (Paragraph 0044, 0036).
Guillemette ‘380 does not specifically teach the structure includes at least one recyclate.
Riisse teaches various co-extruded components comprise 1 to 99 wt% of recycled material (Paragraph 0025, 0110-0111). Riise teaches the use of recycled material provides the advantage of being better for the environment and reduces waste. (Paragraph 0004, 0036). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use recycled content in to the multi-component structure of Guillemette ‘380 to make a product that’s better for the environment and reduces waste.
Regarding Claim 2, Guillemette ‘380 teaches alternating layers of the first and second layers within the structure. (Fig. 6; Paragraph 0025).
Regarding Claims 5-6, Riisse teaches various co-extruded components comprise 1 to 99 wt% of recycled material (Paragraph 0025, 0110-0111). This would overlaps the claimed range of at least 25% vol or at least 50% vol. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05).
Regarding Claim 7, Guillemette ‘380 teaches 11 vertical layers. (Fig. 6). Guillemette ‘380 teaches one or more layers. (Paragraph 0001) Guillemette ‘380 also teaches thousands of layers. (Paragraph 0004). This overlaps the claimed range of 2 to 2,000,000. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05).
Regarding Claim 9, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the layers can have variable or gradient thicknesses. (Paragraph 0048). Therefore, it means the layers would not have a substantially equal thickness. Therefore, this means the at least one first layer and the least one second layer are not of uniform thicknesses.
Regarding Claim 20, Guillemette ‘380 teaches a multi-component structure comprising a multicomponent substrate having a plurality of vertical layers, including at least one first layer and at least one second layer. Guillemette ‘380 teaches the first layer comprises a first polymer and the at least one second layer comprises a second polymer (Paragraph 0001, 0025, 0032).
Guillemette ‘380 teaches at least one of the second layers includes a plurality of horizontal layers. (Fig. 6; Paragraph 0025). Guillemette ‘380 teaches the layers, horizontal and vertical, can include reinforcement filler. (Claim 8 of Guillemette ‘380). Therefore, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the horizontal layer can alternate polymer matrix layers and fiber reinforcement layers. Guillemette ‘380 teaches fibers can be oriented and aligned either parallel or perpendicular to the extrusion axis. (Paragraph 0030). Therefore, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the fibers to extend through a length of the multi-component structure.
Guillemette ‘380 teaches the layers can have variable or gradient thicknesses. (Paragraph 0048). Therefore, it means the layers would not have a substantially equal thickness. Therefore, this means the at least one first layer and the least one second layer are not of uniform thicknesses.
Guillemtte ‘380 does not require the multicomponent to be electrically conductive, and states the component can inhibit electrical current, and can include various non-conductive additives, such as vegetable fibers or wood fibers. (Paragraph 0044, 0036).
Guillemette ‘380 does not specifically teach the structure includes at least one recyclate.
Riisse teaches various co-extruded components comprise 1 to 99 wt% of recycled material (Paragraph 0025, 0110-0111). Riise teaches the use of recycled material provides the advantage of being better for the environment and reduces waste. (Paragraph 0004, 0036). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use recycled content in to the multi-component structure of Guillemette ‘380 to make a product that’s better for the environment and reduces waste.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillemette ‘380, and Riise, as applied in Claim 1 above, in further view of Langlais et al. (US 2012/0189789 A1).
Regarding Claims 3-4, Guillemette ‘380 and Riise do not specifically teach multicomponent structure has a greater Young’s modulus and toughness than a blended structure with the same volume ratio of material. However, this feature would be inherent to the composite of Guillemette ‘380 and Riise, as both teach the same composition and method of making as the claimed invention. "Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established." (MPEP 2112.01).
Furthermore, Guillemette ‘380 refers to the Langalis reference (Paragraph 0002) Langlais teaches the same micro/nano extrusion of various features and layers, like the Guillemette ‘380 reference. (Abstract). Langalis teaches this process increases the burst strength and tensile strength of the resulting component. (Paragraph 0007). Therefore, it would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to reasonably expect the microstructure of two different materials of Guillemette ‘380 have regular strength and higher tensile strength, Young’s modulus, then a blended structure, as Langlais teaches this layering improves the strength and tensile strength.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillemette ‘380 and Riise, in further view of Ponting et al. (US 2018/0257327 A1)
Regarding Claim 8, Guillemette ‘380 and Riise do not specifically teach the thickness of the plurality of vertical layers.
Ponting teaches a multicomponent dielectric, insulating, film comprising a plurality of vertical layers of first and second layer. (Fig 2-3). Ponting teaches the vertical layers can have a thickness of 5 to 1000 nm. (Paragraph 0045). Ponting teaches this thickness range allows the maximization of breakdown strength of the film and to operate as a dielectric. (Paragraph 0045). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have the thickness ranges taught by Ponting to the layers in Guillemette ‘380 to allow the component to operate as a dielectric.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillemette ‘380 and Riise, as applied in Claim 1, in further view of Han (NPL).
Regarding Claim 10, Guillemette ‘380 and Riise do not specifically teach the at least one material in the at least one first layer and at least one material in the at least one second layer are miscible such that at least one first and at least one least second layer adhere to each other and at least one material in the polymer matrix layers and at least one material in the fiber reinforcement layers are miscible such that the polymer matrix layers and the fiber reinforcement layers adhere to each other. However, Guillemette ‘380 teaches one material is in both the first and second layer can be the same material. (Fig. 6). Therefore, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the at least one material in the at least one first layer and at least one material in the at least one second layer are miscible such that at least one first and at least one least second layer adhere to each other, as the same polymers would be miscible and adhere to each other.
In addition, Han teaches having miscible polymer layers coextruded together leads to stronger adhesive bonds between the layers (Page 406). Therefore, it would have been obvious to ensure teach the at least one material in the at least one first layer and at least one material in the at least one second layer are miscible such that at least one first and at least one least second layer adhere to each other and at least one material in the polymer matrix layers and at least one material in the fiber reinforcement layers are miscible in Guillemette ‘380 to ensure a stronger adhesive bond between the layers and a stronger composite.
Claims 11-12 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillemette ‘380 in view of Langlais.
Regarding Claims 11 and 16, Guillemette ‘380 teaches a multi-component structure comprising a multicomponent substrate having a plurality of vertical layers, including at least one first layer and at least one second layer. (Fig. 6).
Guillemette ‘380 teaches the first layer comprises a first polymer and the at least one second layer comprises a second polymer (Paragraph 0001, 0025, 0032). Guillemette ‘380 teaches the substrate can have any necessary number of layers until the desired profile is formed; therefore, there is a preset ratio between the first and second material volume ratio. (Paragraph 0025).
Guillemette ‘380 teaches at least one of the second layers includes a plurality of horizontal layers. (Fig. 6; Paragraph 0025). Guillemette ‘380 teaches the layers, horizontal and vertical, can include reinforcement filler. (Claim 8 of Guillemette ‘380). Therefore, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the horizontal layer can alternate polymer matrix layers and fiber reinforcement layers. Guillemette ‘380 teaches fibers can be oriented and aligned either parallel or perpendicular to the extrusion axis. (Paragraph 0030). Therefore, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the fibers to extend through a length of the multi-component structure.
Guillemette ‘380 teaches the structure can inhibit electrical current, which makes the structure an insulator. (Paragraph 0044)
Guillemette ‘380 does not specifically teach the structure has higher toughness and Young’s modulus than a 1D layered structure with the same material volume ratio.
However, this feature would be inherent to the composite of Guillemette ‘380, as Guillemette ‘380 teach the same composition and method of making as the claimed invention. "Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established." (MPEP 2112.01).
In addition, Langlais teaches the same micro/nano extrusion of various features, like the Guillemette ‘380 reference. (Abstract). Langalis teaches this process increases the burst strength and tensile strength of the resulting component. (Paragraph 0007). Therefore, it would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to reasonably expect the microstructure of two different materials of Guillemette ‘380 have regular strength and higher tensile strength, Young’s modulus, then a 1D structure, as Langlais teaches this layering improves the strength and tensile strength.
Regarding Claim 12, Guillemette ‘380 teaches alternating layers of the first and second layers. (Fig. 6; Paragraph 0025).
Regarding Claim 17, Guillemette ‘380 teaches 11 vertical layers. (Fig. 6). Guillemette ‘380 teaches one or more layers. (Paragraph 0001) Guillemette ‘380 also teaches thousands of layers. (Paragraph 0004). This overlaps the claimed range of 2 to 2,000,000. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillemette ‘380 and Langalis, as applied in Claim 11, in further view of Riise.
Regarding Clams 13-15, Guillemette ‘380 does not specifically teach the structure includes at least one recyclate.
Riisse teaches various co-extruded components comprise 1 to 99 wt% of recycled material (Paragraph 0025, 0110-0111). Riise teaches the use of recycled material provides the advantage of being better for the environment and reduces waste. (Paragraph 0004, 0036). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use recycled content in to the multi-component structure of Guillemette ‘380 to make a product that’s better for the environment and reduces waste.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillemette ‘380 and Langalis, as applied in Claim 11, in further view of Ponting.
Regarding Claim 18, Guillemette ‘380 and Langalis do not specifically teach the thickness of the plurality of vertical layers.
Ponting teaches a multicomponent dielectric, insulating, film comprising a plurality of vertical layers of a first and second layer. (Fig 2-3). Ponting teaches the vertical layers can have a thickness of 5 to 1000 nm. (Paragraph 0045). Ponting teaches this thickness range allows the maximization of breakdown strength of the film and to operate as a dielectric. (Paragraph 0045). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have the thickness ranges taught by Ponting to the layers in Guillemette ‘380 to allow the component to operate as a dielectric.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillemette ‘380 and Langalis, as applied in Claim 11, in view of Han.
Regarding Claim 19, Guillemette ‘380 and Langlais do not specifically teach the at least one material in the at least one first layer and at least one material in the at least one second layer are miscible such that at least one first and at least one least second layer adhere to each other and at least one material in the polymer matrix layers and at least one material in the fiber reinforcement layers are miscible such that the polymer matrix layers and the fiber reinforcement layers adhere to each other. However, Guillemette ‘380 teaches one material is in both the first and second layer can be the same material. (Fig. 6). Therefore, Guillemette ‘380 teaches the at least one material in the at least one first layer and at least one material in the at least one second layer are miscible such that at least one first and at least one least second layer adhere to each other, as the same polymers would be miscible and adhere to each other.
In addition, Han teaches having miscible polymer layers coextruded together leads to stronger adhesive bonds between the layers (Page 406). Therefore, it would have been obvious to ensure teach the at least one material in the at least one first layer and at least one material in the at least one second layer are miscible such that at least one first and at least one least second layer adhere to each other and at least one material in the polymer matrix layers and at least one material in the fiber reinforcement layers are miscible in Guillemette ‘380 to ensure a stronger adhesive bond between the layers and a stronger composite.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 9:30am-3:30pm, 8:30PM-10:30PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached on (571) 270-1547. 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.
/Michael Zhang/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights