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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/27/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tatsuro (JP 08-199448) in view of DiTullio (USPN 4,359,501).
Regarding Claim 1, Tatsuro discloses a mesh woven fabric (Para. 1) comprising a warp thread (Para. 1) and a weft thread (Para. 1), wherein a bending angle of the warp thread and a bending angle of the weft thread at an intersection where the warp thread and the weft thread intersect each other are different from each other (Para. 40-43), and a rate of an absolute value of a bending angle difference between the warp thread and the weft thread to an average of the bending angle of the warp thread and the bending angle of the weft thread is 20% or less (Para. 40-43 & 50-68) and the mesh woven fabric satisfies two conditions described below: a rate of an absolute value of a tensile strength difference between a warp direction and a weft direction to an average of a tensile strength in the warp direction and a tensile strength in the weft direction is 20% or less; and a rate of an absolute value of a tensile elongation difference between the warp direction and the weft direction to an average of a tensile elongation in the warp direction and a tensile elongation in the weft direction is 68% or less (Para. 40-43 & 50-68). Tatsuro does not specifically disclose each of the warp thread and weft thread is a monofilament having a diameter of 10um or more. However, Tatsuro discloses a single filament needs to be between 4d and .1d, which would include the range of having a diameters of 10/um or more. Furthermore, DiTullio discloses a woven fabric using monofilament warp and weft threads having a diameter of 10um or more (Col. 4, lines 39-55 & Col 7, lines 3-22). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the warp and weft thread as claimed, since it is well within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known thread on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. Also, such a modification would be considered a mere choice of preferred thread that is on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. In other words, using a monofilament thread for the weft and warp at the diameter more than claimed would have been an "obvious to try" approach because the use of such a material that is not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.
Regarding Claim 2, Tatsuro discloses in curves showing a relation between a tensile load 36 and a tensile elongation percentage, with respect to slopes in elastic deformation regions of the curves, a rate of an absolute value of a slope difference between the warp direction and the weft direction to an average of a slope for the warp direction and a slope for the weft direction is 62% or less (Para. 40-43 & 50-68).
Regarding Claim 3, Tatsuro discloses a rate of an absolute value of a thermal deformation amount difference between a warp direction and a weft direction to an average of a thermal deformation amount in the warp direction and a thermal deformation amount in the weft direction is 180% or less (Para. 37-43 & 50-68).
Regarding Claim 4, Tatsuro discloses at least one of the warp thread and the weft thread is a synthetic fiber (Para. 22).
Regarding Claim 5, Tatsuro discloses the synthetic fiber is a PE fiber, a PTFE fiber, a PPS fiber, an LCP fiber, or a PEEK fiber (Para. 22).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as discussed supra.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHARINE KANE whose telephone number is (571)272-3398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm EST.
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, KHOA HUYNH can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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.
/KATHARINE G KANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights