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 .
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 11, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by FR2912427A1.
FR ‘427 discloses a nonwoven sheet for use as a reinforcement for a sealing membrane. See abstract. The membrane is formed from fibers such as lyocell fibers. See page 3 of the machine translation. The fibers should be rendered hydrophobic. See page 3, last paragraph and page 4, first paragraph. The fibers can be treated by a hydrophobic treatment such as fatty acids. The fabric can be a nonwoven fabric which can be consolidated by compression and/or a needling or hydroentangling process. See page 3. The nonwoven can have a weight of 50-400 gsm. See claim 2. The membrane can be impregnated with a bituminous material. See claim 34. The hydrophobic agents can be present in the fibers in amounts of 0.5-1% by weight. See claim 8. The fabric can further comprise additional types of fibers such as heat bondable fibers as a minority of the fibers. See page 3.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 9, 11, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Migliavacca et al, U.S. Patent No. 2021/0040293.
Migliavacca discloses a nonwoven fabric which is useful as a support for a bituminous membrane. The nonwoven fabric can be formed from hydrophobic fibers such as regenerated cellulose fibers, see paragraph 0039, wherein the fibers can be staple fibers. See paragraph 0035. The fibers can include a hydrophobic agent in amounts of 0.5-4%. See paragraphs 0035-0038. The structure can be impregnated with bitumen. See claim 40. The structure can be used to cover a building or roof. See claim 39. The nonwoven has a Youngs modulus of 46-122 Mpa. See claim 38.
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) 1-9, 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FR2912427A1.
FR ‘427 discloses a nonwoven sheet for use as a reinforcement for a sealing membrane. See abstract. The membrane is formed from fibers such as lyocell fibers. See page 3 of the machine translation. The fibers should be rendered hydrophobic. See page 3, last paragraph and page 4, first paragraph. The fibers can be treated by a hydrophobic treatment such as fatty acids. The fabric can be a nonwoven fabric which can be consolidated by compression and/or a needling or hydroentangling process. See page 3. The nonwoven can have a weight of 50-400 gsm. See claim 2. The membrane can be impregnated with a bituminous material. See claim 34. The hydrophobic agents can be present in the fibers in amounts of 0.5-1% by weight. See claim 8. The fabric can further comprise additional types of fibers such as heat bondable fibers as a minority of the fibers. See page 3.
FR’427 differs from the claimed invention because it does not clearly teach the particularly claimed hydrophobic substances, does not teach clearly teach that the regenerated cellulose fibers are present in amounts of 20-80%, the use of thermal bonds, the air permeability , thickness, tensile strength, elongation at break or the specific temperatures of bonding the layers or providing the material into a roll.
However, since FR ‘427 teaches employing hydrophobic substances including fatty acids, it would have been obvious to have selected from among known hydrophobic additives in order to provide hydrophobic regenerated cellulosic fibers. With regard to the amount of cellulose fibers and heat bonding, since FR teaches that heat bonding fibers can be added in a minor amount, it would have been obvious to have selected the particular amounts of heat bonding fibers and to have employed thermal bonding in order to further strengthen and stabilize the structure. With regard to the particular properties of air permeability, strength, elongation at break, it would have been obvious to have selected the thickness and amount of air permeability, strength, and elongation at break which provided a suitably durable laminate structure. With regard to the particular temperatures, it would have been obvious to have selected processing temperatures which were high enough to bond the layers without being high enough to damage the fibers. It further would have been obvious to have added adhesive onto the structure in order to bond it to other structures such as roofing and to have provided the laminate in a roll in order to facilitate storage and transportation of the laminate.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9- 11, 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Migliavacca et al, U.S. Patent No. 2021/0040293.
Migliavacca discloses a nonwoven fabric which is useful as a support for a bituminous membrane. The nonwoven fabric can be formed from hydrophobic fibers such as regenerated cellulose fibers, see paragraph 0039, wherein the fibers can be staple fibers. See paragraph 0035. The fibers can include a hydrophobic agent in amounts of 0.5-4%. See paragraphs 0035-0038. The structure can be impregnated with bitumen. See claim 40. The structure can be used to cover a building or roof. See claim 39. The nonwoven has a Youngs modulus of 46-122 Mpa. See claim 38.
Migliavacca differs from the claimed invention because it does not clearly teach the particularly claimed hydrophobic substances, the length and denier of the staple fibers, the air permeability , thickness, tensile strength, elongation at break or the specific temperatures of bonding the layers or providing the material into a roll.
However, since Migliavacca teaches employing hydrophobic substances including fatty acids, it would have been obvious to have selected from among known hydrophobic additives in order to provide hydrophobic regenerated cellulosic fibers. With regard to the length of the staple fibers, it is noted that staple fibers generally have a length of 6 mm to 15 cm. With regard to the particular properties of air permeability, strength, elongation at break, it would have been obvious to have selected the thickness and amount of air permeability, strength, and elongation at break which provided a suitably durable laminate structure. With regard to the particular temperatures, it would have been obvious to have selected processing temperatures which were high enough to bond the layers without being high enough to damage the fibers. It further would have been obvious to have added adhesive onto the structure in order to bond it to other structures such as roofing and to have provided the laminate in a roll in order to facilitate storage and transportation of the laminate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M IMANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Wednesday 7AM-7:30; Thursday 10AM -2 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/ELIZABETH M IMANI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights