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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior rejections have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to all of the references being used in the current rejection. The current rejection utilizes the same references, yet in a different order, Hintz (US 20050176834 A1) in view of Na et al. “Thermal Stability of Poly (acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) Copolymers ” under new ground(s) of rejection which renders obvious the instant claims.
Applicant’s argument, see page 6, states “Na is directed to a poly-(acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) copolymer, without an acidic group (-COOH) and/or a neutralized acid group (-COO-) that is contained in the claimed cross-linked polymer of a water-soluble ethylene-based unsaturated monomer having at least partially neutralized acidic groups. Thus, lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM) used in Na cannot be absorbed on the surface of the copolymer particles as there is no hydrophilic/ hydrophobic moiety on the surface of the copolymer particles and thus no bonding between the surface of the copolymer particles and lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM)” (Remarks, page 6, para 1).
In response, Applicant’s arguments are acknowledged but not persuasive. Hintz teaches a water absorbent composition (Abstract) comprising monoethylenically unsaturated monomers (a1) which may be partially or completely neutralized (para 0031). The composition utilizes monomers such as methyl acrylic acid/methyl acrylate, along with copolymers of (a1) including acrylonitrile (paras 0035, Examples). These are combined with a crosslinker agent (component A3), specifically ethylene carbonate (para 0044). Hintz further teaches the inclusion of auxiliary substances (A6) including stabilizers, to optimize the structure of the foam and to improve stability of the foam, in amounts ranging from approximately 0.01 to 15 wt. % (para 0054-0055). Furthermore, Hintz teaches the addition of said auxiliary substances, specifically stabilizers, following polymerization (para 0054 and 0057). This particular process overlaps with the method claimed for placing the additive on the surface, as described in the [instant specification at page 34, lines 23-30].
Na et al. teaches lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM hereinafter, which overlaps the carboxylic acid additive of Chemical Formula 1-1) as a stabilizer within a copolymer composition comprising poly(acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) (Abstract). As a result, the depress of thermal degradation during the production and thermal stability is stabilized (Introduction).
The cited references collectively teach the same monomers (i.e., methyl acrylate and acrylonitrile) to form a copolymer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to expect that incorporating the LAM stabilizer (the claimed carboxylic acid additive) into the Hintz composition would result in at least portion of the additive being present at the surface. The expectation is driven by the anticipated interaction of the neutralized or partially neutralized acid-functional copolymer with other claimed components, which facilitates absorption and bonding, placing the LAM stabilizer on the surface of the copolymer particles. Furthermore, Hintz overlaps with the method claimed for placing the additive on the surface. As such, when combined with general knowledge in the art, render the claimed carboxylic acid additive surface characteristic obvious.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hintz ( US 20050176834 A1) in view of “Thermal Stability of Poly (acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) Copolymers ” Na et al.
With regard to claim 1, Hintz teaches a water absorbent composition (Abstract) comprising monoethylenically unsaturated monomers (a1) which may be partially or completely neutralized (para 0031). The composition utilizes monomers such as methyl acrylic acid/methyl acrylate, along with copolymers of (a1) including acrylonitrile (paras 0035, Examples). These are combined with crosslinker agent (component A3), specifically ethylene carbonate (para 0044).
Hintz further teaches the inclusion of auxiliary substances (A6) including stabilizers, to optimize the structure of the foam and to improve stability of the foam, in amounts ranging from approximately 0.01 to 15 wt. % (para 0054-0055). Furthermore, Hintz teaches the addition of the auxiliary substances, following polymerization (para 0054 and 0057). This particular process overlaps with the method claimed for placing the additive on the surface, as described in the [instant specification at page 34, lines 23-30].
However, Hintz fails to teach or suggest a carboxylic acid-based additive, nor does Hintz disclose the presence of such additive at the surface of the composition.
In the same field of endeavor, Na et al. teaches lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM hereinafter, which overlaps the carboxylic acid additive of Chemical Formula 1-1) as a stabilizer within a copolymer composition comprising poly(acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) (Abstract). As a result, the depress of thermal degradation during the production and thermal stability is stabilized (Introduction).
With regard to the carboxylic acid-based additive, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to utilize LAM (a stabilizer) into the copolymer composition of Hintz. The person having ordinary skill in the art would expect the modification represents a predictable use of known stabilizing agents to enhance the thermal and overall compositional stability, as taught by Na et al.
With regard to the carboxylic acid-based additive on the surface, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to expect that incorporating the LAM stabilizer (the claimed carboxylic acid additive) into the Hintz composition would result in at least portion of the additive being present at the surface. The expectation is driven by the anticipated interaction of the neutralized or partially neutralized acid-functional copolymer with other claimed components, which facilitates absorption and bonding, placing the LAM stabilizer on the surface of the copolymer particles. Furthermore, Hintz overlaps with the method claimed for placing the additive on the surface. As such, when combined with general knowledge in the art, render the claimed carboxylic acid additive surface characteristic obvious. As such, when combined with general knowledge in the art, render the claimed carboxylic acid additive surface characteristic obvious.
With regard to claim 3, Hintz does not teach the chemical formula.
In the same field of endeavor, Na et al. teaches a poly- (acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) copolymer contains lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM) (which structure contains C12H25 at A) (1.2 Synthesis of LAM).
As stated above, Hintz in combination of Na et al. teaches the carboxylic acid-based additive.
With regard to claim 4, Hintz does not teach the chemical formula.
In the same field of endeavor, Na et al. teaches a poly- (acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) copolymer contains lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM) (which structure contains -OCO- at B1) (1.2 Synthesis of LAM).
As stated above, Hintz in combination of Na et al. teaches the carboxylic acid-based additive.
With regard to claim 5, Hintz does not teach the chemical formula.
In the same field of endeavor, Na et al. teaches a poly- (acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) copolymer contains lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM) (which structure contains -CH=CH- at B2) (1.2 Synthesis of LAM).
As stated above, Hintz in combination of Na et al. teaches the carboxylic acid-based additive.
With regard to claim 6, Hintz does not teach the carboxylic acid-based additive.
In the same field of endeavor, Na et al. teaches a poly- (acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate)
copolymer contains lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM) (which structure satisfies Chemical Formulae 1-1; monolauryl maleate; 1.2 Synthesis of LAM).
As stated above, Hintz in combination of Na et al. teaches the carboxylic acid-based additive.
With regard to claim 7, Hintz does not teach the carboxylic acid-based additive.
In the same field of endeavor, Na et al. teaches a poly- (acrylonitrile-methyl acrylate) copolymer contains lauryl alcohol maleic anhydride (LAM) (which structure satisfies Chemical Formulae 1-1; monolauryl maleate; 1.2 Synthesis of LAM).
As stated above, Hintz in combination of Na et al. teaches the carboxylic acid-based additive.
With regard to claim 8, Hintz teaches that the auxiliary substance (A6), more specifically stabilizers in a range of approximately 0.01 to 15 wt. % (para 0056).
With regard to claim 9, Hintz teaches a water absorbent composition with crosslinkers such as ethylene carbonate within the composition (which can satisfy as an internal crosslinking agent; Example 4, paras 0121), and further teaches the ethylene carbonate is distributed uniformly on the resulting foam and subjects to after-crosslinking (which can satisfy as a surface crosslinking agent; Example 17, para 0137).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aja A Walker whose telephone number is (571)272-0037. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-5.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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.
/A.A.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/TANISHA DIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights