DETAILED ACTION
NEW REJECTIONS
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claim(s) 1, 3 – 4, 7 – 13, 15, 21 – 25 and 27 – 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0108223 A1) in view of Tai et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0237747 A1).
With regard to Claim 1, Lam et al disclose a geomembrane (paragraph 0175) comprising a monolayer comprising an interpolymer (paragraph 0171) or the ethylene interpolymer in more than one layer of a multilayer film (paragraph 0172) in which the layers are bonded together with an adhesive (paragraph 0173). The ethylene interpolymer comprises a first and second ethylene interpolymer (paragraph 0006) and an additional thermoplastic is disclosed (paragraph 0171) that is a barrier that is EVOH (paragraph 0057). The geomembrane therefore comprises a barrier layer ‘A,’ an adhesive layer ‘B’ and a thermoplastic resin layer ‘C’ that is also a barrier layer, comprising the ethylene interpolymer, in direct contact with the adhesive layer. The adhesive layer is therefore between the barrier layer and the thermoplastic resin layer. Other components are not required. Layer ‘C’ therefore consists of the EVOH and another additive, which is the ethylene interpolymer. Lam et al do not disclose that additional layers are required, or that polyamide is required. A structure that includes 3 layers and that excludes polyamide is therefore disclosed.
Lam et al fail to disclose the claimed adhesive layer and modified EVOH having a primary hydroxyl group.
Tai et al disclose a geomembrane (paragraph 0305) comprising EVOH (paragraph 0027) that is modified, because it contains structural units ‘I’ or ‘II,’ for the purpose of obtaining improved flexibility and processing characteristics compared to unmodified EVOH (paragraph 0024, 0027) having a primary hydroxyl group (paragraph 0026) and an adhesive comprising acid – modified polyolefin (paragraph 0179) for the purpose of obtaining a geomembrane having enhanced interlayer adhesiveness (paragraph 0154). Tai et al is in the same field of endeavor, which is geomembranes as evidenced by paragraph 0305.
It therefore would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art for the disclosed EVOH to comprise 20 – 50% ethylene content by weight that is modified and for the disclosed geomembrane to comprise adhesive comprising acid – modified polyolefin in order to obtain superior gas barrier properties and durability and enhanced interlayer adhesiveness as taught by Tai et al.
With regard to Claim 3, the ethylene – vinyl alcohol copolymer taught by Tai et al is modified (paragraph 0103) by being reacted with epoxypropane (paragraph 0105); the delamination strength after being immersed in hot water is therefore higher than before immersion in hot water, as disclosed in Table 1 of the instant specification.
With regard to Claims 4 and 7, the claimed modifying group is taught by Tai et al (paragraph 0024).
With regard to Claim 8, Tai et al do not teach the claimed amount of modifying group. However, an amount is taught that is no less than 0.5 mol% and no greater than 30 mol% (paragraph 0024). Although the disclosed range of amount is not identical to the claimed range, the disclosed range overlaps the claimed range. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide for any amount within the disclosed range, including those amounts that overlap the claimed range. MPEP 2144.05.
With regard to Claim 9, the claimed modifying group is taught by Tai et al (paragraph 0315).
With regard to Claims 10 — 11, the amount of the modifying group taught by Tai et al is 2.5 mol% (paragraph 0315).
With regard to Claim 12, the thermoplastic resin layer “C’ comprises an antioxidant (paragraph 181 of Lam et al).
With regard to Claim 13, because the claimed geomembrane would be obtained, a geomembrane that is capable of use at a location that is a landfill is therefore disclosed. A landfill sheet is therefore disclosed.
With regard to Claims 15 and 21 — 23, because the claimed structure would be obtained, a radon barrier film would be obtained. Additionally, a radon barrier film is explicitly taught by Tai et al (paragraph 0305).
With regard to Claims 24 – 25, a single layer thickness of 0.1 to 100 m is taught by Tai et al for the purpose of obtaining durability and flexibility that are improved compared to other thicknesses (paragraph 0018). It therefore would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide for a single layer thickness of 0.1 to 100 m in order to obtain durability and flexibility that are improved compared to other thicknesses. Although the disclosed ranges of thickness and percent thickness are not identical to the claimed ranges, the disclosed ranges overlap the claimed ranges. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide for any amounts within the disclosed ranges, including those amounts that overlap the claimed ranges. MPEP 2144.05.
With regard to Claim 27, the barrier layer is therefore between two adhesive layers, and is in contact with the adhesive layers.
With regard to Claim 28, a laminate with polyester is disclosed by Lam et al (paragraph 0175). A thermoplastic resin layer ‘C’ is therefore disclosed that is polyester, and that excludes polyethylene.
With regard to Claim 29, the other additive disclosed by Lam et al comprises an antioxidant (paragraph 0181).
With regard to Claim 30, the EVOH taught by Tai et al comprises 20 – 50% by weight ethylene (paragraph 0027). The amount of the ethylene interpolymer disclosed by Lam et al is about 3% by weight, because the lower limit of amount may be about 3% by weight (paragraph 0171). Although the disclosed amount is not identical to the claimed amount, and does not overlap the claimed amount, the disclosed amount would be sufficiently close to the claimed amount that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the same properties. There is a prima facie case of obviousness because the amount would be sufficiently close to the claimed amount that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the same properties. MPEP 2144.05.
3. Claim(s) 5 – 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0108223 A1) in view of Tai et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0237747 A1) and further in view of Okamoto et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0210788 A1).
Lam et al and Tai et al disclose a geomembrane as discussed above. With regard to Claim 5, Lam et al and Tai et al fail to disclose a modifying group that is two hydroxymethyl groups.
Okamoto et al teach ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer comprising a modifying group that is two hydroxymethyl groups (paragraph 0038) for the purpose of providing excellent barrier property, processability and flexibility (paragraph 0037). Okamoto et al is in the same field of endeavor, which is ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer, as evidenced by Okamoto et al.
It therefore would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art for the EVOH to comprise a modifying group that is two hydroxymethyl groups in order to obtain excellent barrier property, processability and flexibility as taught by Okamoto et al.
With regard to Claim 6, the claimed amount of the modifying group is taught by Okamoto et al (paragraph 0062).
4. Claim(s) 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0108223 A1) in view of Tai et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0237747 A1) and further in view of Bertrand (U.S. Patent No. 9,085,899 B1).
Lam et al and Tai et al disclose a geomembrane as discussed above. With regard to Claims 14 and 16, Lam et al and Tai et al fail to disclose a plurality of geomembranes, joined via double — sided tape and a one — sided tape applied such that it covers the overlap part. However, Betrand teaches that it is well known in the art to provide for overlapping and joining sheets of geomembrane using seaming tape (column 1, lines 20 — 34). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide for overlapping and joining sheets of geomembrane using double — sided seaming tape, adjacent to single — sided seaming tape, in order to provide for geomembranes that are joined as well known in the art as taught by Bertrand. The geomembranes would therefore be joined via a double — sided tape, and a single — sided tape would cover the overlap.
5. Claim(s) 17 – 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0108223 A1) in view of Tai et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0237747 A1) and further in view of Lewis et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0165726 A1).
Lam et al and Tai et al disclose a geomembrane as discussed above. With regard to Claim 17, Lam et al and Tai et al fail to disclose a method for preventing harmful substance diffusion comprising covering a land surface with the geomembrane to isolate a pollution source.
Lewis et al teach covering a land surface that is a waste field “W’ with a geomembrane M for preventing harmful substance diffusion, because sub — surface gas is trapped beneath the geomembrane, for the purpose of preventing the gas from entering the atmosphere and preventing the atmosphere from entering the gas (paragraph 0024; Figure 3). Lewis et al is in the same field of endeavor, which is geomembranes as evidenced by paragraph 0024.
It therefore would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art for the geomembrane to be utilized for prevention of harmful substance diffusion by covering a land surface with the geomembrane as taught by Lewis et al.
With regard to Claim 18, introduction into a collector through a pipe inserted in a hole in the geomembrane is taught by Lewis et al (the pipe is a conduit, and the hole is an aperture, and the collector is a hood ‘250’ and the conduit communicates gas through the geomembrane and discharges gas into the hood; paragraph 0032, Fig 3).
With regard to Claims 19 — 20, because a radon barrier film is disclosed, a method for preventing radon gas diffusion is also disclosed.
6. Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0108223 A1) in view of Tai et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0237747 A1).
Lam et al disclose a geomembrane (paragraph 0175) comprising a monolayer comprising an interpolymer (paragraph 0171) or the ethylene interpolymer in more than one layer of a multilayer film (paragraph 0172) in which the layers are bonded together with an adhesive (paragraph 0173). The ethylene interpolymer comprises a first and second ethylene interpolymer (paragraph 0006) and an additional thermoplastic is disclosed (paragraph 0171) that is a barrier that is EVOH (paragraph 0057). The geomembrane therefore comprises a barrier layer ‘A,’ an adhesive layer ‘B’ and a thermoplastic resin layer ‘C’ that is also a barrier layer, comprising the ethylene interpolymer, in direct contact with the adhesive layer. The adhesive layer is therefore between the barrier layer and the thermoplastic resin layer. Other components are not required. Layer ‘C’ therefore consists of the EVOH and another additive, which is the ethylene interpolymer. Lam et al do not disclose that additional layers are required, or that polyamide is required. A structure that includes 3 layers and that excludes polyamide is therefore disclosed.
Lam et al fail to disclose the claimed adhesive layer.
Tai et al disclose a geomembrane (paragraph 0305) comprising EVOH (paragraph 0027) and an adhesive comprising acid – modified polyolefin (paragraph 0179) for the purpose of obtaining a geomembrane having enhanced interlayer adhesiveness (paragraph 0154). Tai et al is in the same field of endeavor, which is geomembranes as taught by Tai et al.
It therefore would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art for the disclosed geomembrane to comprise an adhesive comprising acid – modified polyolefin in order to obtain enhanced interlayer adhesiveness as taught by Tai et al.
7. Claim(s) 1 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Botros et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0319571 A1) in view of Tai et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0237747 A1).
With regard to Claims 1 and 32, Botros et al disclose a geomembrane comprising a layer of adhesive between a layer of polyethylene and a layer of EVOH (paragraph 0021). The geomembrane therefore comprises a barrier layer ‘A,’ an adhesive layer ‘B’ and a resin layer ‘C’ that is the polyethylene layer. comprising the ethylene interpolymer, in direct contact with the adhesive layer. The adhesive layer comprises carboxylic acid – modified resin that is maleated polyolefin (paragraph 0006). The adhesive layer is therefore between the barrier layer and the resin layer. Extrusion is disclosed (paragraph 0021). Layer ‘C’ is therefore thermoplastic. Other components are not required in Layer ‘A.’ Layer ‘A’ therefore consists of the EVOH. Botros et al do not disclose that additional layers are required, or that polyamide is required. A structure that includes 3 layers and that excludes polyamide is therefore disclosed.
Botros et al fail to disclose modified EVOH having a primary hydroxyl group.
Tai et al disclose a geomembrane (paragraph 0305) comprising EVOH (paragraph 0027) that is modified, because it contains structural units ‘I’ or ‘II,’ for the purpose of obtaining improved flexibility and processing characteristics compared to unmodified EVOH (paragraph 0024, 0027) having a primary hydroxyl group (paragraph 0026) and an adhesive comprising acid – modified polyolefin (paragraph 0179) for the purpose of obtaining a geomembrane having enhanced interlayer adhesiveness (paragraph 0154). Tai et al is in the same field of endeavor, which is geomembranes as evidenced by paragraph 0305.
It therefore would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art for the disclosed EVOH to comprise 20 – 50% ethylene content by weight that is modified and for the disclosed geomembrane in order to obtain superior gas barrier properties and durability and enhanced interlayer adhesiveness as taught by Tai et al.
ANSWERS TO APPLICANT’S ARGUMENTS
8. Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejections of the previous Action under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been carefully considered but have not been found to be persuasive for the reasons set forth below.
Applicant argues, on page 11 of the remarks dated June 11. 2025, that the additive of Claims 1 and 24 does not encompass an ethylene interpolymer and instead is directed at materials such as an antistatic agent, a plasticizer and a filler as in paragraph 0037 of the specification and as understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.
However, Claims 1 and 24 are not limited to non – polymer additives. Additionally, plasticizers and fillers that comprise polymers are not excluded by the specification.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC A PATTERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1497. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aaron Austin, can be reached on 571-272-8935. 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).
/MARC A PATTERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782