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
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.
Claim(s) 1–10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Blum (US 5,922,806).
Blum teaches an aqueous polyurethane dispersion composition used for glass fiber sizing. Blum abstract. The sizing composition includes a polyhydroxyl component, such as a polyester polyol and a polyether polyol; a polyisocyanate component; and a sulphonic acid containing two hydroxyl groups or amino groups or a salt thereof. Id. at abstract, 2:10–40, 3:8–20, 4:12–30, 55–61. The mass ratio of the polyester polyol to polyether polyol may range from 1:9 to 9:1, wherein the polyhydroxyl component may constitute from 50–91 weight percent of the dispersion composition. Id. at 4:22–30. As such, the mass percentage of the polyether polyol present in the sizing composition may be within the claimed range relative to mass of the sizing composition.
Claim 3 is rejected as the polyisocyanate is preferably an aliphatic polyisocyanate. Id. at 6:18–30. Claims 4 and 8 are rejected as the equivalent molar ratio of isocyanate groups to isocyanate-reactive groups of 3:1 to 0.9:1. Id. at 5:27–37.
Claims 5 and 9 are rejected as polyamine is not required in the aqueous polyurethane dispersion composition. Id. passim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D MATZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-5732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571.272.7783. 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.
/MATTHEW D MATZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights