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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 04/28/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 04/28/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would not be a serious search and examination burden if the restriction were not required. This is not found persuasive because the inventions require a separate status in the art in view of their different classifications.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 4 and 8 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 4 recites that each of component A and component B comprise 0-20 parts expansion-layer reinforcing agent. However, claim 3, on which claim 4 depends, recites that “the component A and the component B of the bottom fire-retardant coating material further comprise an expansion-layer reinforcing agent”. Therefore, given that claim 3 requires an expansion-layer reinforcing agent, it is not clear how component A and component B can each comprise “0” parts expansion-layer reinforcing agent.
Claim 8 recites that each of the first component and second component comprise 0-20 parts expansion-layer reinforcing agent. However, claim 7, on which claim 4 depends, recites that “the first component and the second component of the surface fire-retardant coating material further comprise an expansion-layer reinforcing agent”. Therefore, given that claim 7 requires an expansion-layer reinforcing agent, it is not clear how the first component and the second component can each comprise “0” parts expansion-layer reinforcing agent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 5, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cheng et al. (CN 110,183,884 A).
Regarding Claims 1, 5, and 9, Cheng discloses a composite fireproof coating comprising a thick non-intumescent fireproof coating (i.e. bottom fire-retardant coating material) and a thin intumescent fireproof coating (i.e. surface fire-retardant coating material) (pg 1, lines 31-32). Since the thin intumescent fireproof coating is intumescent, the composite fireproof coating is intumescent.
The thick non-intumescent fireproof coating comprises expanded vermiculite and perlite (i.e. physical expansive agent as claimed) (pg 2, lines 5-6).
The thin intumescent fireproof coating comprises melamine (pg 2, lines 16-17), which is a nitrogen-containing compound and gas-foaming expansive agent as claimed, according to pg 5, lines 9-12 of the present specification.
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 2-4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of the evidence of Glastrup (“Degradation of polyethylene glycol. A study of the reaction mechanism in a model molecule: Tetraethylene glycol”).
Regarding Claims 2-4, Cheng discloses all the limitations of the present invention according to Claim 1 above. Cheng further discloses the thick non-intumescent fireproof coating comprises dry powder mixture and water in a ratio of 1:(0.8-1.2) and the dry powder mixture comprises 100 parts silicate cement, 15-30 parts high-aluminum cement, 20-40 parts fire-resistant soil, 50-90 parts expanded vermiculite, 15-50 parts perlite, 25-30 parts sepiolite, 25-30 parts ceramic fiber, 6 parts polyethylene glycol 2000, 6 parts hydrophobic agent, 1 part sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, and 2 parts redispersible latex powder (pg 2, lines 11-15).
Therefore, the total parts of dry powder mixture is 265 to 385 parts (100+15+20+50+15+25+25+6+6+1+2 to 100+30+40+90+50+30+30+6+6+1+2), and the water is 212 to 462 parts (265*0.8 to 385*1.2).
According to the evidence of Glastrup, polyethylene glycol produces formic acid during thermal degradation (Abstract) and is therefore an acid catalyst according to the present specification (pg 3, line 26).
Therefore, the thick non-intumescent fireproof coating comprises a Component A, including the 100 parts silicate cement, the 15-30 parts high-aluminum cement (i.e. 115-130 parts binder), the 6 parts polyethylene glycol 2000 (i.e. acid catalyst), and half of the ceramic fiber which would be 12.5-15 (25/2 – 30/2) parts ceramic fiber (i.e. expansion-layer reinforcing agent according to pg 4, lines 11-13 of the present specification), which corresponds to a Component A comprising 19.2-21.7 parts binder (115/6 to 130/6), 1 part acid catalyst, and 2.1-2.5 parts expansion-layer reinforcing agent (12.5/6 to 15/6).
The thick non-intumescent fireproof coating also therefore comprises a Component B, including the 212-462 parts water (i.e. curing agent for the concrete binder), 50-90 parts expanded vermiculite, 15-50 parts perlite (i.e. 65-140 total parts physical expansive agent), and half of the ceramic fiber which would be 12.5-15 (25/2 – 30/2) parts ceramic fiber, which corresponds to a Component B comprising 30.3-66 parts curing agent (212/7 to 462/7), 9.3-20 parts physical expansive agent (65/7 to 140/7), and 1.8-2.1 parts expansion-layer reinforcing agent (12.5/7 to 15/7).
In light of the overlap between the claimed bottom fire-retardant coating material and that disclosed by Cheng, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use bottom fire-retardant coating material that is both disclosed by Cheng and is encompassed within the scope of the present claims, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding Claims 6-8, Cheng discloses all the limitations of the present invention according to Claim 1 above. Cheng further discloses the thin intumescent fireproof coating comprises 15-30 parts acrylic emulsion, 20-30 parts ammonium polyphosphate, 10-25 parts melamine, and 5-10 parts pentaerythritol, and 1-5 parts silicon-modified sepiolite (pg 2, lines 20-22).
Therefore the thin intumescent fireproof coating comprises a Compound A, including the 15-30 parts acrylic emulsion (i.e. binder), the 20-30 parts ammonium polyphosphate (i.e. acid catalyst according to pg 4, lines 1-2 of the present specification), and half the silicon-modified sepiolite which would be 0.5-2.5 (1/2-5/2) parts silicon-modified sepiolite (i.e. expansion-layer reinforcing agent).
The thin intumescent fireproof coating also therefore comprises a Compound B, including the 10-25 parts melamine (i.e. gas-foaming expansive agent), the 5-10 parts pentaerythritol (i.e. curing agent for acrylic emulsion), and half the silicon-modified sepiolite which would be 0.5-2.5 (1/2-5/2) parts silicon-modified sepiolite (i.e. expansion-layer reinforcing agent).
In light of the overlap between the claimed surface fire-retardant coating material and that disclosed by Cheng, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use surface fire-retardant coating material that is both disclosed by Cheng and is encompassed within the scope of the present claims, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BETHANY M MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2109. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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.
/BETHANY M MILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights