Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 26, 2026
Application No. 17/757,450

LOW NUCLEATION TEMPERATURE POLYTHIOETHER PREPOLYMERS AND USES THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 15, 2022
Priority
Dec 17, 2020 — nonprovisional of PCTUS2020065759
Examiner
HESTER, HOLLEY GRACE
Art Unit
1766
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
PPG Industries Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allowance Rate
45 granted / 67 resolved
+2.2% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+41.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
108
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
54.2%
+14.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.5%
-21.5% vs TC avg
§112
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 67 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/21/2026 has been entered. Claim Status Claims 1-20 currently are pending. Claims 1, 12, and 13 are amended, support can be found in the claims as filed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see p. 10, filed 05/21/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) has been withdrawn. Applicant's arguments filed 05/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. (p. 11) Applicants argue, “The polythioether prepolymers recited in claim 1 and claim 12 do not comprise pendent hydroxyl groups directly bonded to the backbone of the prepolymer. The claimed polythioether prepolymers can have pendent hydroxyl groups such as a hydroxyl-substituted C1-6 alkyl group, but these hydroxyl groups are not bonded directly to the polythioether prepolymer backbone. Therefore, because the claimed polythioether prepolymers have a different chemical structure than the polythioether prepolymers disclosed by Sawant, and because Sawant does not disclose that the polythioether prepolymers have greater than 10 mol% of non-linear segments having pendent groups, the amended claims are patentable over Sawant.” In claim 1, applicants recite – each R1 is independently selected from substituted C1-10 alkanediyl; each R is independently selected from substituted C1-16 alkyl; each R2 is independently selected from substituted C2-10 alkanediyl; each R3 is independently selected from substituted C1-10 alkanediyl. A similar recitation is found in claim 12. Applicants’ specification recites – “Substituted” refers to a group in which one or more hydrogen atoms are each independently replaced with the same or different substituent(s). A substituent can be —OH [p. 0093, all references drawn to PG-Pu]. In light of this, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the argument that the claimed polythioethers have a different chemical structure than those disclosed by Sawant. Furthermore, applicants’ specification recites pendent groups are bonded to the backbone of the prepolymer such as to a repeating segment of the prepolymer backbone [p. 0340]. The specification refers to allyl glycidyl ether (AGE) as a suitable thiol-reactive monomer which generates a hydroxyl pendent group upon reaction with a thiol group, as disclosed in Examples 1 and 2 [p. 0344, all references drawn to PG-Pub]. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawant et al (US 20040247792 A1). Regarding claims 1-8 and 12-20, Sawant et al teaches polythioether polymers, processes for producing polythioether polymers, curable compositions of polythioether polymers, and the use of polythioether polymers in aviation and aerospace sealants, wherein the polythioether polymers and curable compositions are liquid at a temperature of 20 °C [p. 0012]. Sawant exemplifies the preparation of a polythioether prepolymer comprising: 2,2′-(Ethylenedioxy)diethanethiol (DMDO), 2,2′-Thiodiethanethiol (DMDS), allyl glycidyl ether (AGE), triallyl cyanurate (TAC), and di(ethylene glycol) divinyl ether (DEG-DVE) [example 1]. Wherein, DMDO and DMDS read over C2-C10 heteroalkanediyl derivatives of instant formula (4); DEG-DVE reads over C2-C10 heteroalkanediyl derivatives of instant formula (7); and TAC reads over instant formula 8 [example 1, p. 0043-0044, 0045-0049]. The reacted residue of AGE, after the alkene and polythiol reaction, reads over instant formula (10), wherein a=3 and a=2. PNG media_image1.png 221 574 media_image1.png Greyscale The polythioether prepolymer of Sawant et al is prepared from the reaction mixture shown in the table above [example 1]. 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). Sawant et al teaches the number of repeat units of the polythioether prepolymer is selected in order for the polymer to have a molecular weight between 500 and 20,000 Da, and in certain embodiments from 2,000 and 5,000 Da [p. 0026, 0039, 0053]. However, Sawant et al fails to teach the number of repeat units (n) in the prepolymer or the final molecular weight of the polymer of example 1. Considering the relative abundance of the monomers shown in the table above, the average molecular weight of the repeat units of the polymer of Sawant et al is 164.9 Da. A skilled artisan would appreciate that to satisfy the range of 500 to 20,000 Da as taught by Sawant et al, the polymer would have a number of repeat units (n) of n=3 to n=121. In light of this, the general teachings of Sawant et al appear to obviously embrace polymers of n=1 to n=60 as claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Regarding claim 9, Sawant et al teaches the polythioether prepolymers have functionalities of 2.05 to 3.0[p. 0067, 0095, claim 25]. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Regarding claim 10, Example 1 of Sawant et al has a sulfur content of 26 wt. % based on the total weight of the polythioether prepolymer. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Regarding claim 11, The molar ratio of residues of non-linear monomers (AGE) to adducts from linear dithiol and dialkenyl monomers in the polythioether prepolymer is 0.13:1 in example 1 of Sawant et al In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLEY GRACE HESTER whose telephone number is (703)756-5435. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00AM -5:00PM. 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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571) 272-1302. 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. /HOLLEY GRACE HESTER/Examiner, Art Unit 1766 /RANDY P GULAKOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 15, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Aug 26, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 21, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §103
May 21, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
May 22, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12767828
USE OF EPOXIDIZED OILS WITH ISOCYANATES AND OTHER RESINS FOR LIGNOCELLULOSIC COMPOSITES
3y 8m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12735533
TOUGHENED RESIN COMPOSITION
3y 11m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729306
SILICONE GEL COMPOSITION, CURED PRODUCT THEREOF, AND USE THEREFOR
3y 8m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12674023
HYDROXYL-TERMINATED POLYESTER RESIN, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR AND USE THEREOF
3y 8m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12655293
THERMALLY-CONDUCTIVE SILICONE COMPOSITION
2y 10m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+41.1%)
3y 3m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 67 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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