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.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozeki et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2013/0274413), in view of Rudolph et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0061934). Regarding Claims 1-2, Ozeki et al., hereafter “Ozeki,” show that it is known to have a filament (0127) wherein the filament comprises a first group of fiber bundles, a second group of fiber bundles, and a matrix resin impregnated in the first group of fiber bundles and the second group of fiber bundles (0019), wherein fiber orientation is variable (0023). Ozeki does not specifically disclose the twisting angle of the first group of fiber bundles relative to the second group of fiber bundles. Rudolph et al., hereafter “Rudolph,” show that it is known to have a filament comprising two fiber bundles, wherein a twisting angle of a first group of fiber bundles is smaller than a twisting angle of a second group of fiber bundles (0006, 0010: first group is straight (0) which is less than the second group (45)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to twist Ozeki’s fiber bundles in the manner described by Rudolph in order to satisfy particular properties, e.g. shear, of the final filament (Rudolph, Abstract).
Regarding Claims 3-4, Ozeki shows the filament of claim 1 above, but he does not specifically disclose the orientation of the first group of fiber bundles. Rudolph shows a filament wherein an orientation direction of a reinforcing fiber in the first group of fiber bundles is aligned parallel to an axial direction of the filament (0010).
Regarding Claim 5, Ozeki shows the filament of claim 2 above, including one wherein an outer circumference of the second group of fiber bundles is covered with the matrix resin (0019).
Regarding Claim 6, Ozeki shows the filament of claim 5 above, but he does not show a groove shape in the filament. However, it would have been obvious to use any appropriate shape for Ozeki’s filament, including the claimed groove, because configuration is held to be a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant (MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(B)).
Regarding Claim 7, Ozeki shows the filament of claim 1 above, including one wherein the matrix resin is a thermosetting resin (0069).
Regarding Claims 8-16, Ozeki shows the filament of claims 1-7 above, but he does not show the particular way of using the filament. Rudolph shows that it is known to carry out a method which includes thermally melting a filament which comprises two groups of fiber bundles and ejecting a thermally melted manufacturing material to additively manufacture a manufactured object (0009). It would have been obvious to use Ozeki’s filament in an additive manufacture process of Rudolph because there is art recognized suitability for using a filament which comprises two groups of fiber bundles in the additive manufacturing industry (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claims 17-18, Ozeki shows the filament of claims 1 and 8 above, including one wherein the first group of fiber bundles and the second group of fiber bundles are composed of the same reinforcing fibers (0019: carbon).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-18 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are drawn to the claims as-amended, which required further consideration and search.
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 MONICA HUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
MONICA ANNE HUSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/MONICA A HUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights