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 Hattori et al (US 20170306134) maintained and therefore it is proper to make this rejection FINAL.
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, 11-12, 18, and 22-24. 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).
Hattori teaches an ethylene - based ionomer , comprising : 99 . 9 to 70 . 0 mol % in total of units derived from at least one selected from the group consisting of
ethylene and - olefins having 3 to 20 carbon atoms ; and 0 . 1 to 30 . 0 mol % in total of units derived from at least one selected from the group consisting of an unsaturated carboxylic acid and unsaturated carboxylic acid ester , wherein at least a part of polar groups in at least one of the ethylene / unsaturated carboxylic acid copolymer and the ethylene / unsaturated carboxylic acid ester copolymer having the following features ( a ) to ( c ) is converted into a metal - containing carboxylate containing a metal ion of Group 1 , 2 , or 12 of the periodic table and where ( b ) the phase angle d at the absolute value G * = 0 . 1 MPa of a complex elastic modulus measured using a rotary rheometer is 45 degrees to 75 degrees (see claim 12).
Note that Applicant and Hattori use the same or analogous copolymer. In particular, Applicant’s ionomer comprises ethylene, butyl acrylate and Ni complex B27DM (see Table 1, page 20 Production examples 1 and 3 at printed publication). In turn, Hattori discloses the same copolymers (see Table 1, page 20 Production examples 1-5).
Hattori discloses tensile impact strength within the range of 913 kJ/m2 (see Example 9 at Table 5 at page 22).
Note that Hattori does not teach claimed melt flow rate values. However, the reference disclose very wide Molecular weight range, i.e., Mw within the range of 1 000 to 2000000, positively covering claimed MFI range of 1.9 g/10 min or more.
In addition CPG provides a formula connecting MFI and Mw (see previous Office Action)
Hattori does not a claimed formula for melting point determination cited in claim 9.
However, Applicant (see Table 3 at page 21) and Hattori (see Table 3 at page 20) teach the same melting point range of 100-120C.
In reference to claims 11 and 12, Hattori teaches such comonomers as dienes, trienes, aromatic vinyl monomers , and cyclic olefins (see 0067).
Regarding such processing as injection or compression molding, Hattori teaches that the polymer is melt-processed with press forming a sample of a circular shape (see 0283).
In reference to claims 18 and 22-24, Hattori fails to teach haze values.
However, since Applicant and Hattori use the same or analogous copolymers, processed by the same method (see printed publication at 0154 and Hattori at 0283) physical properties of the final articles are expected to be equal.
The claiming of a new use, new function or unknown property, which is inherently present in the prior art, does not necessarily make the claim patentable. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
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 the same properties (i.e., particularly haze and melting point) from Applicant’s and Hattori’s articles, since they have the same structure and obtained by the same processing method.
The rejection can be found in the NON-FINAL office action mailed 1/30/2026 and is herein incorporated by reference
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Examiner’s assumption that molecular weight range of 1000-2000000 covers MFI range of 1.9 g/10 min or more.
This is incorrect. Both Applicant and Hattori disclose a polymer processable by injection molding and compression molding.
Hattori’s disclosure covers the entire range from low molecular weight oligomer to ultra-high molecular weight polymer.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights