Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This communication is in response to the election filed 6/16/2026.
Claims 1-22 are pending. Claims 1-7 and 18-22 are withdrawn, directed to a non-elected invention.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group II in the reply filed on 6/16/2026 is acknowledged.
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 8-17 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 8 recites a first step of pyrolyzing two pitch compositions followed by a step for obtaining an infrared spectrum of the two pitch compositions. It is unclear if the infrared spectrum is obtained on the two pitch compositions before or after pyrolyzing.
Claim 8 recites obtaining an infrared spectrum, selecting a parameter based on the spectrum, wherein the parameter is within a range, and blending the two compositions to achieve the selected range. It is unclear if the first and second parameters and ranges claimed characterize the first and second pitch compositions, characterize the blend, or both. If the ranges for first and second parameters limit the first and second pitch compositions, respectively, a parameter obtained by spectrum data here would be measured and not selected. If the first and second parameters limit the blend, examiner suggests amending the last two bullets of the claim to make clear, for example: wherein the selected first and second infrared parameters are at least one or both of an A-Factor and an Aromaticity; and blending the first and second pitch compositions in a ratio to achieve at the selected first and second infrared parameters, wherein the A-Factor is in a range of about 0.4 to about 0.8 and the Aromaticity is in a range about 0.3 to about 1.3.
A-factor is not a term in the art. It is defined here according to the specification as “changes in the integrated intensities of absorbance from aliphatic CH2 relative to aromatic C=C ring stretching vibrations of a sample”. Par. [0040].
Claims 9-17 depend from claim 8 and are similarly rejected.
Claims 9-11 recite wherein the first and second infrared parameters further include a softening point and mesophase volume. However, these are not infrared parameters, but properties which may be correlated with infrared parameters.
Claim 14 recites obtaining an infrared spectrum, selecting an initial parameter based on the spectrum, wherein the parameter is within a range. The infrared parameter is a measured/calculated value based on the feed sample and not a value selected.
Claims 15-17 depend from claim 14 and are similarly rejected.
Claim 15-16 recites wherein the pyrolyzing further comprises contacting the pitch feeds in a specific way. However, the pyrolyzing step of claim 8 acts upon the pitch compositions and not the pitch feeds.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 8-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isayev (US 7,018,526) in view of Izmui (EP 0055024).
With respect to claim 8, Isayev teaches a method comprising the following steps:
Providing a mesophase pitch which may be subject to additional heat treatment, such as placing mesophase pitch powder in a vacuum oven, with exposure to flowing air, at a temperature of from about 230 to 300 C for a few minutes to hours. Col. 7, lines 56+. Providing a mesophase pitch itself includes the step of pyrolyzing at least a first pitch composition from a first pitch feed. Further, the optional heat treatment of the mesophase pitch is a pyrolysis step of the first pitch.
Providing a partially anisotropic pitch, the anisotropic pitch provided by pyrolyzing an isotropic pitch or mixture of isotropic and mesophase pitches. Col. 4, lines 9+; col. 5, lines 1+.
Blending the at least partially infusible synthetic mesophase pitch powder with the partially anisotropic pitch powder in a ratio to form a blended pitch composition. Col. 3, lines 60+.
Isayev teaches mixing two pyrolyzed pitch compositions to form a blended pitch having blended properties. Isayev recognizes the individual pitch properties and ratio of each pitch selected will influence properties of the blend. Isayev is silent regarding selection of such ratio, including obtaining a first infrared spectrum of the at least first pitch composition and selecting at least one first infrared parameter of based on (1) the first infrared spectrum and a calibration curve or (2) the first infrared spectrum and chemometric modeling; obtaining a second infrared spectrum of the at least second pitch composition and selecting at least one second infrared parameter based on (1) the second infrared spectrum and a calibration curve or (2) the second infrared spectrum and chemometric modeling; wherein the selected first and second infrared parameters are at least one or both of an A-Factor in a range of about 0.4 to about 0.8 and/or an Aromaticity in a range of about 0.3 to about 1.3; and wherein the blending the first and second pitch compositions achieves the selected first and second infrared parameters.
In analogous art of pitch production, EP 0055024 discloses a process for producing optically anisotropic pitch having characteristics suitable for high quality fiber production. A first starting heavy hydrocarbon oil, tar or pitch is subject to the thermal cracking/polycondensation at a temperature of higher than 380°C for a long period to obtain an optically anisotropic pitch having high contents of components C and B, low contents of O and A, and a high softening point. Page 24. Separately, a starting material of the same is thermally cracked/polycondensed at the same temperature for a relatively short time to obtain isotropic pitch having low contents of components C and B, high O and A. Id. The two pitches are mixed at a ratio to achieve the desired properties. Id. The properties include, among others, fluidity, softening point, molecular structure. The pitch may be analyzed by analyzing the pitch infrared spectrum for aromaticity (fa), C/H ratio, and molecular weight, which correlate to the desired properties. Page 21, 15-16. Using the formula for fa on page 21, and the data listed for the samples in the tables, the value of aromaticity (intensity of the aromatic / intensity of the aliphatic) can be obtained and is within a range overlapping that claimed. Page 21.
Therefore, before the filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select the ratios of each pitch component in the process of Isayev by taking and utilizing spectroscopic data of each pitch, including measuring aromaticity, to achieve an anisotropic blend for use in carbon article production as taught in Izumi because both are directed to analogous art, Isayev teaches blending pitch to achieve a blend of desired properties for carbon article production and Izmui teaches selecting the components of a pitch blend based on the properties of the pitch fractions, including aromaticity. The combination combines the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than results predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art of allowing tailoring the ratio of individual pitch components to achieve a final blend having desired properties. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416, 82 USPQ2d at 1395; see MPEP § 2143.
With respect to claim 9-11, Isayev teaches wherein the heat-treated pitches include a softening point temperature between 134 and 363 °C for the mesophase and between 152 and 316 °C for the anisotropic pitch. Table 1. The mesophase content of the same ranges from 2.7 and 81°C for mesophase after heat treatment and between 6.2 and 75.5 for the blend. Table 1. The characterized pitches include a range of properties overlapping or encompassing those claimed and include specific samples which anticipate a first or second infrared parameter of the type and range claimed in claims 9-11.
With respect to claim 12, “the mixture is spun into fibers.” Col. 4, lines 4+.
With respect to claim 13, Isayev teaches “pitch moldings of this invention may be subjected to carbonization or graphitization.” Col. 10, lines 6+.
With respect to claim 14, Isayev discloses that the feed character prior to pitch heat soaking affects the character of the heat-soaked pitch and determines the time needed for soaking. Col. 5, lines 45+. Izumi teaches determining spectrographic data and parameters to correlate final product properties to determine blending ratios. Therefore, before the filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Isayev in view of Izumi to include spectrographic data of the feed prior to soaking in operating the process to achieve the desired blend properties.
With respect to claim 15, Isayev teaches the pyrolyzing of the first (col. 7, lines 56+) and second (col. 8, lines 16+) may occur in the presence of oxygen under pyrolyzing temperatures and reduced pressures in the ranges claimed.
With respect to claim 16, “[d]uring stabilization of pitch fibers, low molecular weight volatile components within the pitch are evaporated”, col. 2, line 16, and here the two pitches may be subject to stabilization. Col. 2, lines 59+; col. 7, lines 56+; col. 8, lines 7+.
With respect to claim 17, the reactive gas may be oxygen. Col. 7, lines 56+; col. 8, lines 16+.
Additional Art of Record
US 5746906 teaches obtaining and utilizing various characteristics such as softening point and aromaticity to characterize coal tar pitches for applicability in these various manufacturing processes and industries. A blended pitch is produced from coal tar pitch, which is characterized by a high PAH content, with petroleum pitch, typically having a low PAH content; the blending occurring after initial processing in a heated tank until the desired characteristics are achieved. Aromaticity of the pitch plays an important role in predicting final characteristics of the carbon product and may be determined by infrared spectroscopy.
US 2983665 teaches looking to properties of pitch in determining suitability for carbon fiber production, including aromatic content (col. 2). The index given is intensity of aliphatic/ intensity of aromatic carbons determined by infrared. The index in Table 3 is in the same range as claimed for aromaticity when converted to aromatics/aliphatic.
FR 2532322 teaches the characteristics of a pitch feed play an important role in the properties of high-performance carbon fibers produced therefrom. Such characteristics include aromaticity which may be determined through spectrographic data.
EP 120698 teaches a process for producing a pitch for use in high strength carbon artifacts. Abstract. The process produces pitch capable of specific and controllable composition using blending of more than one pitch components. Page 8. The pitch utilizes blending of one or more pitches or components thereof, including optionally more than one heat-soaked pitch to give optimized mixture and properties needed for downstream artifact production. Pages 2-3, 7, and 8-9. The ranges of each component provided to make the unique precursor will be determined based on the desired characteristics of the end carbon artifact to be produced. Page 13. The properties of the pitch which are tailored include viscosity and softening point, aromatic content, molecular weight, degree of anisotropic structure or ability to form anisotropic structure, and solubility of components, among others. Page 4; Table 3. The characteristics of pitches may be determined by spectroscopic data such as NMR aromaticity and carbon/hydrogen ratio (which is known to be determined by infrared spectroscopy). Page 4; Table 3. The relationship between component fractions and the strength of the product may be correlated. Page 8, 11; Figure 2.
EP 1225160 teaches selecting a pitch for carbon foam production, wherein the pitch has a softening point of 300 °C or less, a ratio (Daromatic/Daliphatic) of the absorption intensity of an aromatic C-H stretching vibration, measured with FT-IR, to the absorption intensity of an aliphatic C-H stretching vibration, measured with FT-IR, is 4.0 or less (with a number of pitch examples in the range claimed), and whose optically anisotropic content is at least 80 %.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brandi Doyle whose telephone number is (571)270-1141. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 3:00 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, Prem Singh can be reached at (571)272-6381. 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.
/BRANDI M DOYLE/Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights