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 election, without traverse, of Group I claims 1-9 directed to a preparation method of a flash-spun/electrospun composite superfine nanofiber material is acknowledged. Accordingly, claim 10 is withdrawn from consideration at this time.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dickenson et al., U.S. Patent Number 5,227,107 in view of JP 2021-147901 al. and in further view of Starke, Sr. et al. US Patent Number 5 ,816,700, and in further view of Kim et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2009/0325449 further view of Chan et al., KR 20090033588
Regarding claim 1, Dickenson discloses an enhanced composite spinning apparatus for producing a non-woven web comprising a first spinning equipment 18 and a second spinning equipment 19 and a receiving conveyor belt 24 wherein the first spinning equipment and the second spinning equipment are both located above the receiving conveyor belt at opposite positions with a distance of D [Figures5-6; 8-9 and column 6, lines 49-66; column 11, lines 8- -13; col. 12, line 20 to col. 9, line 3; col. 10, line 1, to col. 13, line 2) wherein the first and second spinning equipment can be meltblowing equipment, spunbonding equipment or other fiber source).
Dickenson et al. (US 5,227,107) is silent to the first spinning equipment being a flash spinning equipment, the second spinning equipment being an electrospinning equipment, the conveyor belt being grounded, or the value range of D being 15-40 cm, as recited by the instant claims. JP 2021-147901 (see English translation) discloses that nonwoven fabric (web) can be produced by a direct spinning, such as a spunbond method, a meltblown method, a flashing spinning method and an electrospinning method [0028].
Starke, Sr. et al. (US 5,816,700) disclose a spinning equipment for producing a nonwoven web (col. 4, lines 56-574; web made of strands) comprising a flash spinning equipment 10 comprising a flash spinning spinneret unit 52 comprising a first spinneret 52 (fig. 1; col. 4, lines 35-58), wherein the spinneret 52 is located above a receiving conveyor belt 56 (fig. 1).
Kim et al. (US 2009/0325449) disclose a spinning equipment for producing a nonwoven web [0024], comprising an electrospinning equipment (fig. 1) comprising a high-voltage power supply (fig. 1) and an electrospinning spinneret unit 102, the electrospinning spinneret unit 102 comprises a spinneret 102, and the spinneret 102 is connected to the high-voltage power supply (figs. 1-2a; [0019]-[0029]); wherein the spinneret 102 is located above a receiving conveyor belt 110 (fig. 1), the conveyor belt 110 being grounded (figs. 1-2a; [0019]-[0029]).
Chan discloses in reference claim 11 wherein an ultrafine fiber layer is prepared by the combination of flash spinning and electrospinning. The abstract of Chan discloses a nanofiber composite sheet including a nanofiber layer and a microfiber layer. Example 1 of Chan discloses an applied voltage of about 50 kV and a distance of 30 cm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the first spinning equipment of Dickenson with a flash spinning equipment as disclosed by Starke as Dickenson discloses that the first spinning equipment can be another fiber source wherein both Dickenson disclose forming nonwoven webs. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the second spinning equipment of Dickenson with a electrospinning equipment as disclosed by JP 2021-147901 as Dickenson discloses that the second spinning equipment can be another fiber source with Dickenson and JP 2021-147901 being used to form nonwoven webs. Also, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Dickenson with Kim to have the receiving conveyor belt being grounded to protect the spinning equipment from electrical surges from the high voltage source. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would modify the spinning equipment of Dickenson with Chan to have a distance of 30 cm and a voltage to form a nonwoven web as both Dickenson and Chan disclose a nonwoven having moisture permeability [Chan – abstract].
Regarding claim 2, none of Dickenson, JP 2021-147901 al. Starke, Sr., nor Kim disclose an electrospinning solution comprising a polymer I and a solvent I; the polymer I is polyethylene, polyvinylidene fluoride, polyacrylonitrile, polyurethane or polyvinyl butyral, the solvent I is N,N-Dimethylformamide (DMF), Dimethylacetamide (DMAc), dichloromethane, 1H,6H-perfluorohexane, n-pentane or cyclopentane; and a concentration of the polymer I in the electrospinning solution is 2-40 wt%. Chan discloses electrospinning of a polymer such as polyurethane in DMF and THF to a 15% concentration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would utilize the solution mixture of Chan for the benefit of obtaining a composite sheet having enhanced permeability.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,448,709. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims in both the present application and the patented reference recite a flash evaporation/electrospinning composite spinning equipment, comprising a flash spinning equipment, an electrospinning equipment, and a grounded receiving conveyor belt; wherein the flash spinning equipment comprises a flash spinning spinneret unit, the flash spinning spinneret unit comprises a first spinneret, and the first spinneret is grounded; the electrospinning equipment comprises a high-voltage power supply and an electrospinning spinneret unit, the electrospinning spinneret unit comprises a second spinneret, and the second spinneret is connected to the high-voltage power supply; wherein the first spinneret and the second spinneret are both located above the receiving conveyor belt at opposite positions with a distance of D, and a value range of D is 15-40 cm. The patented reference teaches the claimed invention but fails to recite a composite superfine nanofiber material. The patented recites the same preparation method as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to recognize that the method of the patented reference would yield a composite superfine nanofiber material as the patented reference recites the same preparation method as claimed, absent any evidence to the contrary.
Claims 3-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Applicant claims a preparation method of flash-spun/electrospun composite superfine nanofiber material as recited in claim 1, further including the limitations as recited in claims 3-9. The prior art recited above does not provide for the limitations of claims 3-9.
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