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 .
Response to Amendment
The Examiner acknowledges the remarks and amendments filed on 7/21/26. Claims 1 and 9 have been amended. Claims 1-9 are pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verschuere EP_3689980_A1 in view of Tanaka WO_2005049746_A1 (see machine English translation) and Jing WO_2019241186_A1.
1. Regarding Claims 1, 4, 6, and 9, Verschuere discloses certain articles that are made by way of what corresponds to lamination such as a seal (corresponds to instant Claim 6) (paragraph 0071) which can be made by applying a fluoropolymer composition coating (corresponds to claimed rubber coating film) to a substrate (paragraphs 0069, 0071) wherein the fluoropolymer can comprise a composition comprising FFKM (corresponds to claimed perfluoroelastomer) that is crosslinked by a curing agent (corresponds to claimed crosslinking agent), and a solvent (paragraphs 0017, 0028). The afore-described composition would correspond to the claimed crosslinked product. Verschuere also discloses that said curing agent (corresponds to claimed crosslinking agent) can comprise:
PNG
media_image1.png
664
780
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(paragraph 0048); which corresponds to Applicants’ claimed bis(aminophenol) compound formulas 1-3 and 4-6.
2. However, Verschuere does not disclose the claimed thickness. Also, Verschuere does not disclose the claimed type of solvent.
3. Tanaka discloses a fluorine-containing elastomer coating composition (Title) that is excellent in solution solubility and can also be used in the lamination of forming seals (paragraph 0096). Tanaka specifically discloses using a perfluoroelastomer coating (Claim 1) that can have a thickness of 10 microns (paragraph 0124); thereby meeting the thickness limitation of instant Claims 1 and 4.
4. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the thickness of the perfluoroelastomer coating, of Verschuere, by trying the use of a 10 micron perfluoroelastomer coating, as disclosed by Tanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in doing so in order to obtain excellent solution solubility and excellent thermal stability (paragraph 0140).
5. First, it should be noted that the primary reference, of Verschuere, states that in addition to its use of ketone solvents, other solvents can also be mixed (paragraph 0067). In this vein, Jing discloses a fluoropolymer coating composition and method thereof (Title) that can comprise perfluorinated solvents such as perfluorocarbons, hydrochlorofluorocarbons, perfluoropolyethers, hydrofluorocarbons, fluorinated slkyl amines, as well as fluorinated ketones (Page 20, Lines 12-15).
6. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the solvent, of Verschuere, by trying the use of other perfluorinated solvents with its fluorinated ketones, as disclosed by Jing. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in doing so out of a desire to try other solvents out of a desire of optimization given that prior art has mentioned them as alternative equivalents of one another in the field of fluoropolymer coating compositions.
7. Regarding Claim 2, Verschuere in view of Tanaka and Jing suggests using seals that can be made of metal (Verschuere: paragraph 0071, Tanaka: paragraph 0097).
8. Regarding Claim 3, Verschuere in view of Tanaka and Jing suggests using seals such as engine head gasket, metal gasket, oil pan gasket, crankshaft
seal, camshaft seal, valve stem seal, manifold packing, oil hose, oxygen sensor seal, ATF hose, injector O-ring, injector packing, fuel pump O-ring, diaphragm, fuel hose, crankshaft seal, gearbox seal, power piston packing, cylinder liner seal, valve stem seal, automatic transmission front pump seal, rear axle pinion seal, universal joint gasket, speedometer pinion seal, foot brake piston cup, torque transmission O-ring, oil seal, exhaust gas recombustion device seal, bearing seal, EGR tube, twin carb tube, carburetor sensor diaphragm (Tanaka: paragraph 0097), while Verschuere discloses using seals of components or linings of chemical reactors, molds, chemical processing equipment for example, for etching, or valves, pumps and tubing, in particular for corrosive substances or hydrocarbon fuels or solvents; combustion engines, electrodes, fuel transportation, containers for acids and bases and transportation systems for acids and bases, electrical cells, fuel cells, electrolysis cells and articles used in or for etching (paragraph 0071). Moreover, Verschuere discloses that its substrates can be made of
glass, plastics, rubbers, fluoropolymers, polymer-non-polymer composites, polymer-polymer composites, metals, metal alloys, wood, paper, fabric among others and may include but are not limited to circuit boards, garments, reactors, microreactors, medical devices or components of medical devices, valves or components of valves (paragraph 0071). It is well known that many of these are made from elastomeric materials.
9. Regarding Claim 5, Verschuere in view of Tanaka and Jing suggests using nitrile group-containing perfluorovinyl ethers for its perfluoroelastomers (paragraphs 0020, 0030, 0034, Claim 12).
10. Regarding Claims 7 and 8, Verschuere in view of Tanaka and Jing suggests using spraying and dipping as coating methods (Verschuere: paragraph 0071).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to all claim(s) 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.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAHSEEN KHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1140. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Saturdays 08:00AM-10:00PM.
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 at 5712701547. 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.
/TAHSEEN KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 September 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights