DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or 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 .
Status of the Claims
2. Claims 1-6, 9, 11-20 are currently pending. Claim 11 has previously been withdrawn without traverse as being drawn to a non elected invention. Claims 1-6, 9, 12-20 are currently under examination. This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 08/15/2025.
Claim Interpretation
3. The limitation of “wherein part or all of the chain terminals has a functional group F containing at least one element selected from the group consisting of nitrogen, silicon, oxygen and sulfur” is given its broadest interpretation that while the functional group F must be at the terminal of the four or more polymer branch chains it does not have to be at a terminal of the block copolymer as a whole. Each polymer chain would have 2 terminals to it. This would mean that a functional group resulting from a coupling agent which couples the 4 or more polymer chains together would be considered to meet this limitation as this functional group would be at the terminal end of each of the 4 polymer chains.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
4. Claim 1-6, 9, 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the block polymer” which does not have enough antecedent basis in the claim and it is not clear if this refers to the block copolymer composition as a whole or to the polymer having multi branched structure which is the only polymer indicated to have blocks.
Claims 5 recites “the polymer block B has the functional group F” which does not have enough antecedent basis for “the functional group F”.
Claims 2-4, 6, 9, 11-20 are rejected as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
5. Claim(s) 1-6, 9, 12-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kameda (US 2018/0201716 A1).
Concerning claim 1-2, 5, 14 Kameda teaches an adhesive composition of a partially hydrogenated block copolymer having a polymer block A comprising vinyl aromatic monomer unit as a main component and a polymer block B comprising a conjugated diene monomer unit as main component (paragraph 0068, 0073 and 0132). The conjugated diene monomer unit is indicated to preferably be 1,3 butadiene (paragraph 0084) and the amount of hydrogenation of the conjugated diene is from more than 0 to 97 mol% (paragraph 0086-0087). This would correspond to a value α of from 0 to 0.97 which is an overlapping range with the claimed range. The average vinyl content of the pre hydrogenated conjugated diene monomer of the partially hydrogenated block copolymer is preferably 15 to 75 mol% (paragraph 0147). This would correspond to a value β of from 0.15 to 0.75 which is an overlapping range with the claimed range.
Kameda further teaches that at least one functional group selected from the group consisting of a hydroxyl group an acid anhydride group an epoxy group an amino group a silane group and a alkoxy silane group may be added to the partially hydrogenated block copolymer by using a compound having one of the indicated groups as a polymerization initiator , coupling agent or terminator (paragraph 0120). When one of these functional groups is used it would result at least part of the chain terminals having a functional group which is one of the groups indicated above which all contain nitrogen silicon or oxygen.
Kameda teaches that examples of the prehydrogenated structure of the partially hydrogenated block copolymer include but are not particularly limited to (paragraph 0133-0134)
PNG
media_image1.png
184
388
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Where A represents a polymer block comprising a vinyl aromatic monomer as a main component B1 represents a polymer block comprising a conjugated diene monomer as a main component X represents the residue of a coupling agent or a residue of a polymerization initiator such as a polyfunctional organo lithium and Mn and k each represent an integer of 1 or greater and preferably an integer of 1 to 5.
Kameda teaches that the partially hydrogenated block copolymer from the perspective of shortening the dissolution time during production preferably comprises a partially hydrogenated block copolymer d1 comprising on polymer block A1 comprising a vinyl aromatic monomer unit as a main component and one polymer block B1 comprising a conjugated diene monomer unit as a main component where the polymer d1 corresponds to the structure (7) indicated above in which n is 1 (paragraph 0137) which is indicated to be present in an amount of from 20 % mass or more and 80% mass or less (paragraph 0138), and which would correspond to a linear polymer.
Kameda further teaches that from the perspective of a low viscosity and high tack holding power of the viscous adhesive composition the partially hydrogenated block copolymer comprising a partially hydrogenated bloc copolymer having a radial structure in which 3 or more polymers are bond to a residue X (paragraph 0139) and preferably from the perspective of a high tack strength low viscosity and high tack holding power includes the partially hydrogenated block copolymer having a radial structure of [(A-B1)k]m-X or [(A-B1)k-A]m-X where m is an integer of 3 to 6 and k denotes an integer of 1 to 4 (paragraph 0140).
Kameda teaches a block copolymer composition which is made by polymerizing a monomer composition that only has styrene as the monomer (paragraph 0400) after which butadiene was continuously supplied into the reactor and reacted (paragraph 0401). After the temperature in the reactor indicated a maximum value a coupling agent of tetraethoxysilane was added in a molar ratio of 0.1 based on the total number of moles of N-butyl lithium used to make the styrene polymer in the first step and the reaction carried out for 10 minutes (paragraph 0401). The partially hydrogenated copolymer was indicated to have 65 mass percent of a (S-B) structure, 4% by mass of a (S-B)2-X, 8% by mass of a structure of (S-B)3-X and 23% by mass of (S-B)4-X where S is a styrene block B is a butadiene block and X is a coupling agent residue (paragraphs 0404-0408). The degree of hydrogenation is 40 mol% (paragraph 0403) the vinyl content of the butadiene was 34 mol% (paragraph 0402). As such this polymer composition includes a linear polymer and 23 mass % of a polymer having a multi branched structure having four polymer chain branches wherein each polymer chain branch includes a polymer Block A that is 100% butadiene and a polymer block B which contains 100 mass% of styrene aromatic vinyl compound. Each chain branch has two chain terminals oen of which is attached to the coupling agent residue of tetraethoxysilane which would be a functional group containing at least a silicon atom which corresponds to the structure of the functional group at a terminal of the polymer block A. .
This example differs from claimed block copolymer composition in that the block polymer has a hydrogenation value of 40% corresponding to an α value of 0.40 and a vinyl content before hydrogenation of 34 mol% corresponding to a β value of 0.34.
However as is stated above Kameda generally teaches that the amount of hydrogenation of the conjugated diene is from more than 0 to 97 mol% (paragraph 0086-0087). This would correspond to a value α of from 0 to 0.97 which is an overlapping range with the claimed range. The average vinyl content of the pre hydrogenated conjugated diene monomer of the partially hydrogenated block copolymer is preferably 15 to 75 mol% (paragraph 0147).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05.I.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to alter the exemplary block copolymer composition of Kameda to have the claimed α and β values because Kameda teaches that the general ranges of α value and β value which overlap with the claimed ranges of these values.
Concerning claims 3 and 15 Kameda renders obvious the block copolymer composition according to claim 1 as is stated above.
The examples of Kameda teach that the amount of the 4 branch containing polymer in the composition is 23 mass %.
Kameda is silent as to using the claimed 50 to 80% mass of the polymer having a multi branched structure.
Kameda teaches that the partially hydrogenated block copolymer from the perspective of shortening the dissolution time during production preferably comprises a partially hydrogenated block copolymer d1 comprising on polymer block A1 comprising a vinyl aromatic monomer unit as a main component and one polymer block B1 comprising a conjugated diene monomer unit as a main component where the polymer d1 corresponds to the structure (7) indicated above in which n is 1 (paragraph 0137) which is indicated to be present in an amount of from 20 % mass or more and 80% mass or less (paragraph 0138), and which would correspond to a linear polymer.
Kameda further teaches that from the perspective of a low viscosity and high tack holding power of the viscous adhesive composition the partially hydrogenated block copolymer comprising a partially hydrogenated bloc copolymer having a radial structure in which 3 or more polymers are bond to a residue X (paragraph 0139) and preferably from the perspective of a high tack strength low viscosity and high tack holding power includes the partially hydrogenated block copolymer having a radial structure of [(A-B1)k]m-X or [(A-B1)k-A]m-X where m is an integer of 3 to 6 and k denotes an integer of 1 to 4 (paragraph 0140). Given the amount of linear polymer indicated to be present in the block copolymer composition the maximum amount of the radial polymer having 4 arms would be 80 mass%. The structure of the radial polymer would result in the functional group at a terminal of polymer block A as is stated in the discussion of claim 1.
This would indicate that increasing the amount of the radial block copolymer having 4 arms in the block copolymer composition would provide increased tack strength, tack holding power but would also increase the dissolution time during production which is indicated to be detrimental.
Decreasing the amount of the radial block copolymer having 4 arms in the block copolymer composition would decrease the tack strength and the tack holding power but would also decrease the dissolution time during production.
The amount of the radial block copolymer having 4 arms would be able to be controlled by the amount of the coupling agent used as well as the amount of time during which the coupling reaction is allowed to proceed.
Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05.II.A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to optimize the amount of the polymer having a multi-branched structure in the block copolymer composition to give the claimed block copolymer composition for the purpose of tailoring the tack strength, tack holding power and the dissolution time during production.
Concerning claim 4, 12-13, 16-18 Kameda does not specifically indicate that the functional group of the block copolymer having a multi branched structure is selected from a primary secondary or tertiary amino group.
Kameda teaches that at least one functional group selected from the group consisting of a hydroxyl group an acid anhydride group an epoxy group an amino group a silane group and a alkoxy silane group may be added to the partially hydrogenated block copolymer by using a compound having one of the indicated groups as a polymerization initiator , coupling agent or terminator (paragraph 0120). Kameda teaches that coupling agents and terminators containing nitrogen containing groups are preferably (paragraph 0124) which can include tetraglycidyl metaxylenediamine, tetraglycidyl 1,3 bisaminoethyl cyclohexane, tetraglycidyl phenylene diamine, tetraglycidyl diaminophenyl methane among others. Each of these agents includes a tertiary amino group. Using one of these terminal or coupling agents would result in the functional group being at a terminal of the polymer block A or at a terminal of the polymer block B.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to alter the block copolymer composition of Kameda to include a coupling agent or terminal agent which includes a tertiary amino group to give a functional group at the terminal of the polymer chain that includes a tertiary amino group because Kameda teaches that an amino group containing coupling or terminating agent can be used to provide the indicated functional group.
Concerning claim 6, 19-20 Kameda does not specifically indicate that the functional group of the block copolymer having a multi branched structure is selected from a primary secondary or tertiary amino group.
Kameda teaches that at least one functional group selected from the group consisting of a hydroxyl group an acid anhydride group an epoxy group an amino group a silane group and a alkoxy silane group may be added to the partially hydrogenated block copolymer by using a compound having one of the indicated groups as a polymerization initiator , coupling agent or terminator (paragraph 0120). Kameda teaches that coupling agents containing nitrogen containing groups are preferable (paragraph 0124) which can include tetraglycidyl metaxylenediamine, tetraglycidyl 1,3 bisaminoethyl cyclohexane, tetraglycidyl phenylene diamine, tetraglycidyl diaminophenyl methane among others. Each of these agents is a tetra functional coupling agent which includes a tertiary amino group that includes nitrogen .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to alter the block copolymer composition of Kameda to include a coupling agent which includes a tertiary amino group to give a functional group at the terminal of the polymer chain that includes a nitrogen atom because Kameda teaches that an amino group containing coupling or terminating agent can be used to provide the indicated functional group.
Concerning claim 9 Kameda teaches the composition according to claim 1 as is stated above. Kameda does not specifically teach an example wherein the polymer having a multi branched structure further comprises a polymer block C having a structural unit derived rom a conjugated diene compound and a structural unit derived form an aromatic vinyl compound.
Kameda teaches examples of the prehydrogenated structure of the partially hydrogenated block copolymer include which are used in an asphalt composition or a paving binder composition (paragraph 0212 0216)
PNG
media_image2.png
188
384
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
Kameda teaches that the partially hydrogenated block copolymer from the perspective of shortening the dissolution time during production preferably comprises a partially hydrogenated block copolymer d2 comprising on polymer block A comprising a vinyl aromatic monomer unit as a main component and one polymer block B2 comprising a conjugated diene monomer unit as a main component where the polymer d1 corresponds to the structure (13) indicated above in which n is 1 (paragraph 0220) which is indicated to be present in an amount of from 20 % mass or more and 80% mass or less (paragraph 0221), and which would correspond to a linear polymer.
Kameda further teaches that from the perspective of a low viscosity and high tack holding power of the viscous adhesive composition the partially hydrogenated block copolymer comprising a partially hydrogenated bloc copolymer having a radial structure in which 3 or more polymers are bond to a residue X (paragraph 0222) and preferably from the perspective of a high tack strength low viscosity and high tack holding power includes the partially hydrogenated block copolymer having a radial structure of [(A-B2)k]m-X or [(A-B2)k-A]m-X where m is an integer of 3 to 6 and k denotes an integer of 1 to 4 (paragraph 0222).
The polymer block B2 is indicated to have a lower limit of vinyl aromatic monomer unit content of 5% by mass and an upper limit of preferably 30% by mass or less (paragraphs 0230-0231).
This indicates that the block B2 can have vinyl aromatic units present in them and still have the required 70 %o or more of the conjugated diene monomer. It should be noted that if k is a value which is 2 or more than this would result in a branched polymer structure where there is a block A (claimed block B) that contains styrene as a main component, and two block B which contain both butadiene and styrene. This would allow for one the blocks of butadiene and styrene to be considered to be considered to be the claimed block A and the other to be considered to be the claimed polymer block C.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to alter the block copolymer composition of the example of Kameda to include a minor amount of styrene, of less than 30 % by mass in the butadiene block of the block copolymer because Kameda teaches that certain embodiments desire from 5 to 30 mass % of vinyl aromatic monomer unit to be present in the conjugated diene block and to alter the polymer to have a repeating A-B-A-B structure including at least two of the conjugated diene blocks to give the claimed block copolymer composition that includes a polymer block C that includes a conjugated diene structural unit and an aromatic vinyl structural unit because Kameda teaches that the multi arm block copolymer can have repeating (A-B) block units.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 9, 12-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
7. Claims 1-6, 9, 12-20 are rejected. No claims are currently allowable.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DAVID L MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1297. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:00.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 571-272-1130. 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.
/DAVID L MILLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1763
/JOSEPH S DEL SOLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1763