Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/622,946

RESIN COMPOSITION FOR INJECTION MOLDING OR COMPRESSION MOLDING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 27, 2021
Examiner
LISTVOYB, GREGORY
Art Unit
1765
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Japan Polyethylene Corporation
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
798 granted / 1195 resolved
+1.8% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1234
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
57.7%
+17.7% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1195 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . The previous prior art rejection under Hattori et al (US 20170306134) maintained. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/23/2025 has been entered. 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. Claims 9-12, 16 and 18-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hattori et al (US 20170306134), cited in the previous Office Action as evidences by Cambridge polymer group (CPG). Amendment to claim 9, changing minimal MFR value from 0.5 g/10 min to 1.9 g/10/min is noted. Hattori does not teach such limitation in Examples. However, the reference discloses that the weight average molecular weight (Mw) is typically within a range of 1, 000 to 2, 000 , 000, preferably 25 , 000 to 800 , 000 (see 0086). CPG evidences that the following formula connects MFI and Mw: PNG media_image1.png 52 76 media_image1.png Greyscale where MFI (Melt flow index) is MFR and G and x values depend on the polymer type. Even though Hattori does not teach Mw at MFR value of 1.9, the reference discloses for instance that at MFR of 60 g/10 min is equivalent to Mw 38000, at MFR of 19 g/10min is equivalent to Mw 54000 and at MFR of 8 g/10 min is equivalent to Mw 81000. Thus, when claimed MFR value is 1.9, Mw is clearly more than 100000. Thus, Hattori’s MFR value corresponds with most preferred range of Mw, cited above, which is within the range of 25000 and 800000. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to expect that at least a part of Hattori’s ionomer MFR values are within the claimed range, because the reference teaches Mw within the range of 25000 to 800000. The rejection can be found in the NON-FINAL office action mailed 7/3/2025 and is herein incorporated. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner agrees with Applicant that Hattori does not teach the presently claimed MFR range. However, the reference discloses that weight average molecular weight values are within the range of 25 000 to 800 000 (see 0086). As explained in the rejection above, this Mw range corresponds with the claimed MFR values. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY LISTVOYB whose telephone number is (571)272-6105. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm EST M-F. 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, Heidi Riviere Kelley can be reached at (571) 270-1831. 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. GL /GREGORY LISTVOYB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 27, 2021
Application Filed
Oct 07, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 07, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
May 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 22, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 15, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 19, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 19, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 23, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590182
POLYPHENYLENE ETHER MELT EXTRUSION FORMED BODY AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING POLYPHENYLENE ETHER MELT EXTRUSION FORMED BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590184
POLYIMIDE RESIN MOLDED BODY AND PRODUCTION METHOD FOR SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583987
SURFACE MODIFYING COMPOSITION, MODIFIED PRODUCT, AND METHOD OF PRODUCING MODIFIED PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583974
POLYAMIDE-IMIDE-BASED FILM, PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF, AND COVER WINDOW AND DISPLAY DEVICE COMPRISING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583983
POLYIMIDE FILM HAVING HIGH DIMENSIONAL STABILITY, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+29.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1195 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month