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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 2, 2024, has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim currently reads that the yarn denier is “approximately 400 to 100.” According to the specification, the denier range is 400 to 1000. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 22 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim has not been further treated on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-10, 12-13, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over CN 1942613 (hereinafter CN ‘613, translation provided). CN ‘613 disclose a polyolefin fiber and ultraviolet stabilizing agent (UV absorber) and hindered amine light stabilizing agent (abstract0. The fabric can be used for clothing and furniture and the like. The fabric can be a knitted fabric. The polyolefin substrate can be a high-density polyethylene. Several examples of the ultraviolet absorber are provided. The ultraviolet absorber and hindered amine stabilizers of the present invention are present in a total amount of, for example, about 0.05 to 5% by weight, such as about 0.1 to 1% by weight, and particularly about 0.2 to 0.5% by weight, based on the weight of the polyolefin, as required by claim 1. These fibers can be made by any process known in the art, including but not limited to direct profile extrusion and cut or fibrillated ribbons. Specifically, the composition of the invention is prepared by a melt extrusion process to form fibers or filaments, as required by claim 21 . Regarding claims 3, 6, and 9, the invention is not limited to monocomponent fibers. It is expected that polyolefin bicomponent fibers, especially polypropylene and polyethylene side-by-side or core-core fibers, will prove to have the same practical benefits as polypropylene or polyethylene monocomponent fibers. Regarding claims 5, 8, 10, the fiber of the present invention may be, for example about 1-1500 denier. The composition of the present invention is used for artificial staple fibers, filament yarns, textured filament yarns, strip-like materials, fibrillated strips, films, nonwoven fabrics, woven fabrics and knitted fabrics, needle-punched flocking Blankets, woven and standing felts, woven clothing, furniture and automotive skin materials, woven industrial fabrics, nonwoven sorbents for disposable diapers, nonwovens including disposable medical clothing, filter media, synthetic paper, and more. The polyolefin fibers, filaments, and fabrics of the present invention may also incorporate or apply other suitable additives, such as antioxidants, processing aids, and other additives. For example, the composition of the present invention may also optionally contain about 0.01-10% by weight, preferably about 0.025-5% by weight, especially about 0.1-3% by weight of other additives, such as various conventional stabilizer auxiliary additives. Regarding claims 12-13, mica and titanium dioxide can be added to the HDPE fiber. Dispersants can also be included in the composition.
CN ‘613 disclose the claimed invention except it fails to disclose that the fiber has a heat absorption that is relatively lower than a polymeric fiber without an IR reflective pigment and/or an IR reflective additive. However, because the fiber/fabric of CN ‘613 discloses the same materials in the same amounts as the claimed invention, it would inherently have a similar heat absorption. If not inherent, then it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have made the fiber/fabric of CN ‘613 have a lower heat absorption motivated by the desire to maintain the durability of the fabric.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 1942613 (hereinafter CN ‘613), as shown above, in view of CN 107460624 (hereinafter CN ‘624). CN ‘613 disclose the claimed invention except for the teaching of the fiber diameter.
CN ‘624 disclose a netting material comprising the following steps: preparing raw materials, adopting high-density polyethylene raw materials, adding color masterbatch, anti-UV preparation and stabilizer to the high-density polyethylene raw materials. The warp yarns and the weft yarns are knotted together by a fishnet weaving machine to form a fishing net section. The material is made by using a wire drawing machine to set a fixed drawing multiple to perform a drawing process to form a high-strength fiber yarn, the wire diameter of which is in the range of 0.19 mm to 0.21 mm; The plurality of strands are combined into strands, and the diameter of the strands are in the range of 1.4 mm to 1.49 mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have used the diameter size of CN ‘624 as the fiber diameter of CN ‘613 motivated by the desire to create a fabric that is more easily dyed.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 1942613 (hereinafter CN ‘613), as shown above, in view of KR 20230060570 (hereinafter KR ‘570). CN ‘613 disclose the claimed invention except for the teaching of the fiber width.
KR ‘570 disclose a heat resistant woven film comprising high-density polyolefin-based flat yarn contains 1.0 to 15% by weight of a composite masterbatch for blocking heat rays, 85.0 to 95.0% by weight of high-density polyethylene having a specific gravity of 0.942 to 0.965, and a light stabilizer (HALS) 1.0 It is characterized in that it is a high-density polyolefin-based flat yarn produced by a T-die extrusion method. The HDPE flat yarn has a width of 2.5 mm when prepared. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have made the fiber of CN ‘613 have a width as taught by KR ‘570, motivated by the desire to create a fabric that has enhanced durability.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 1942613 (hereinafter CN ‘613), as shown above, in view of WO 2014/086666 (hereinafter WO ‘666). CN ‘613 disclose the claimed invention except for the teaching that the fiber is comprised of up to 200 individual filaments/strands.
WO ‘666 disclose a fabric comprising polyethylene fibers. Multifilaments preferred according to the present invention have 1-100 filaments, more preferably 5 to 75 filaments and most preferably 10 to 60 filaments. According to the present invention, fibres having a linear density of 1000 to 1 0 denier, preferably 500 to 20 denier and more preferably 200 to 50 denier are used. The threads, yarns, fibres or fi laments thus produced can subsequently be further processed into any desired products such as for example textile fabrics. Preference is given for example to wovens, braids, knits, felts or nonwovens. Particular preference is given to net-like polymeric fabrics such as mosquito nets/ sleeping nets for example.. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have used the teaching of number of 1-100 filaments per strand in the fabric of CN’ 613 motivated by the desire to create a fabric that has increased strength.
Claim(s) 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 1942613 (hereinafter CN ‘613), as shown above, in view of Nasarczyk (US 2012/0238166). CN ‘613 disclose the claimed invention except for the specific teachings of the warp density and gauge.
Nasarczyk disclose a coated waterproof fabric comprising a UV-stabilized high density synthetic yarn. Regarding claims 14-19, the fibers can be HDPE stabilized with HALS and active UV loading of between about 0.4-1 percent. The base fabric can range between 200-380 gsm and the fabric may be knitted with a 6 gauge knit construction (0026). Therefore, it would have been obvious to have used the specific teachings of the knitted fabric and its basis weight in the fabric of CN ‘613, motivated by the desire to create a fabric that allows for increased outdoor exposure.
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 1942613 (hereinafter CN ‘613), as shown above, in view of Bendt et al. (US 2022/0018046). CN ‘613 disclose the claimed invention except for the specific teaching of a fabric cover factor of approximately 90%.
Bendt et al. disclose a UV-A and UV-B permeable fabric wherein the fabric is a knitted fabric (0029). The fabric has a degree of optical covering of at least 40-90%. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have made the fabric of CN ‘613 to have a covering of 90% as taught by Bendt et al., motivated by the desire to create a fabric that is sufficiently opaque.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ULA CORINNA RUDDOCK whose telephone number is (571)272-1481. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-4:30 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, Srilakshmi K Kumar can be reached at 571-272-7769. 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.
/ULA C RUDDOCK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights