www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`14/997,150
`
`01/15/2016
`
`Yuki YOSHIOKA
`
`PIPMM-55429
`
`3619
`
`759°
`52°“
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`
`01’1””
`
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108
`
`MCKINNON LASHAWNDA T
`
`1789
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/10/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`patdoeket@pearne.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`14/997,150
`Examiner
`LASHAWN DA T MCKINNON
`
`Applicant(s)
`YOSHIOKA etal.
`Art Unit
`AIA Status
`1789
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1. 136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 08/30/2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`1—10 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11)[:] The drawing(s) filed on
`
`is/are: a)D accepted or b)l:] objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12):] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)D All
`
`b)I:J Some”
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3.[:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) E] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20181227
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/997,150
`Art Unit: 1789
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice ofPre-AIA 0r AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`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 US C § 103
`
`2.
`
`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.
`
`3.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere C0., 383 U.S. l, 148 USPQ 459
`
`(1966), that are applied 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.
`
`4.
`
`Claims 1-5 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Gordon et al. (PG Pub. 2012/0237576).
`
`6.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Gordon et al. teach a nonwoven fabric comprising fibers nanofibers
`
`(taught as less than 1 micrometer which is inclusive of nanofibers) which contain a polymer and
`
`inorganic particles (e. g. Silica) [0040, 0110 and 0268]. It is noted that Gordon et al. teach that
`
`electrospinning is known in the art [0005], but does not teach the fiber of his invention is
`
`electrospun. However, given Gordon et al. teach electrospinning is known in the art, it would
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/997,150
`Art Unit: 1789
`
`Page 3
`
`have been more than obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to form the fiber as taught by
`
`Gordon et al. by electrospinning in order to produce fibers of a smaller scale and the low
`
`manufacturing costs and because it can combine different materials with a wide range of
`
`properties.
`
`7.
`
`The inorganic particles contain silicone particles and inorganic pigment, zeolite [0151,
`
`0215, 0268 and 0374]. Perfumes (zeolite particles), conditioning agents (silicone particles) and
`
`pigments are taught as active agents which are taught as being present on the surface of the
`
`filament or exposed from a surface of the polymer [0042, 0053 and 0151]. The second particles
`
`can be construed as the silicone particles or inorganic pigments and the zeolite particles can be
`
`construed as the first particles as an example, but are not limited to such. Gordon et al. teach that
`
`the perfume may be provided such that it blooms to the surface once activated and therefore has
`
`more particles buried in the polymer initially. Therefore, Gordon teaches a volume Vlo pf a
`
`portion of the first particles exposed from the surface of the polymer and a volume Vli of a
`
`portion of the first particles buried in the polymer satisfy a relationship Vlo < Vli. Gordon et al.
`
`also teaches the conditioning active agent and/or inorganic pigments are on the surface of the
`
`filament and thus a volume V2o of a portion of the second particles exposed from the surface of
`
`the polymer and a volume V2i of a portion of the second particles buried in the polymer which
`
`satisfies a relationship V2o > V2i.
`
`8.
`
`Gordon et al. are silent regarding the average number N1 of the first particles and an
`
`average number N2 of the second particles per unit length of the nanofibers satisfying the
`
`relationship of N1 > N2. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`to arrive at N1 > N2 in order to ensure that the filament has an abundance of perfume and ensure
`
`the perfume lasts for a long time. It is also noted that the perfume could be construed as the first
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/997,150
`Art Unit: 1789
`
`Page 4
`
`particles and the conditioning agent and/or inorganic pigment could be construed as the second
`
`particles and other combination could be made as well.
`
`9.
`
`Regarding claims 2 and 3, Gordon et al. teach the fiber diameter is less than 1
`
`micrometer (or less than 1000 nanometers [0110]. Gordon et al. teach the particle size is 0.02—02
`
`micrometers (or 20—200 nanometers) in US Patent 6,607,717 which is incorporated in Gordon et
`
`al. Given Gordon et al. teach fiber diameters within the claimed range and particle sizes within
`
`the claimed ranges, it is obvious Gordon et al. is inclusive of the claimed average fiber diameter
`
`and average particle size. Therefore, the claimed ratio of Df/Dp of an average fiber Diameter Df
`
`of the nanofibers to an average diameter Dp of the inorganic fibers would have been obvious to
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art based upon the teachings of Gordon et al. For example a Df
`
`500nm and Dp of 100nm yields a ratio of 5 which is within the claimed range.
`
`10.
`
`Regarding claim 4, Gordon et al. teach the inorganic particles contain third particles
`
`(fillers including silica) which is which are completely buried [0007 and 0372]. Gordon et al.
`
`teach such filler is present up to 45% by weight. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill
`
`in the art at the time of the invention to employ the average number N1 of the first particles and
`
`an average number N3 of the third particles per unit length of the nanofibers to satisfy a
`
`relationship of N1 < N3 in order to employ more particles as filler for a cost savings and ensure
`
`the zeolite perfume particles are at the proper amount to not be overwhelming but yet still
`
`effective.
`
`11.
`
`Regarding claim 5, Gordon et al. teach the amount of inorganic particles is within the
`
`claimed range with respect to 100 parts by mass of the polymer [0016].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/997,150
`Art Unit: 1789
`
`Page 5
`
`12.
`
`Regarding claim 8-10, Gordon et a1. teach silicone used as the perfume and conditioning
`
`agents as silicone particles [0201]. Therefore, Gordon et a1. teach the first and second particles
`
`comprise and consist of the same materials.
`
`13.
`
`Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon
`
`et al. (PG Pub. 2012/0237576) in View of Kujiwara (PG Pub. 2017/0244113).
`
`14.
`
`Regarding claims 6 and 7, Gordon et al. are silent regarding the claimed carbon fiber
`
`nonwoven. However, in the analogous art of fibers, Kajiwara et a1. teach a nonwoven carbon
`
`fiber fabric which is created by firing the nonwoven fabric wherein the polymer is
`
`polyacrylonitrile in order to create a gas diffusion electrode.
`
`15.
`
`Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon
`
`et al. (PG Pub. 2012/0237576) in View of Shirahase et al. (JP 2012102422).
`
`16.
`
`Regarding claims 6 and 7, Gordon et al. are silent regarding the claimed carbon fiber
`
`nonwoven. However, in the analogous art of fibers, Shirahase et a1. teach a nonwoven carbon
`
`fiber fabric which is created by firing the nonwoven fabric wherein the polymer is
`
`polyacrylonitrile in order to create a fabric with good handling.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`17.
`
`Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 08/30/2018 with respect to the rejection(s) of
`
`the claims under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the
`
`rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of
`
`rejection is made in view of Gordon et a1. alone and combined with other references.
`
`Conclusion
`
`18.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to LASHAWNDA T MCKINNON whose telephone number is
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/997,150
`Art Unit: 1789
`
`Page 6
`
`(571)272—6116. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday generally
`
`8:00am—5:00pm EST.
`
`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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
`
`applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
`
`system, see http://pair—direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR
`
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866—217—9197 (toll—free). If you would
`
`like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated
`
`information system, call 800—786—9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571—272—1000.
`
`/Shawn Mckinnon/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 1789
`
`