DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1 and 3-19 are pending as amended on 12/16/2025. Claims 3-14 and 17-19 stand withdrawn from consideration.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/16/2025 has been entered.
Any rejections and/or objections made in the previous Office action and not repeated below are hereby withdrawn. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over König (US 2012/0289634).
As to claims 1 and 16, König discloses a thermoplastic molding composition comprising:
aliphatic polyamide [0007], (corresponding to instant polyamide (A)),
(di)phosphinate salt [0009] (corresponding to instant phosphinic acid salt (B)), and
cyclic phenoxyphosphazene [0008] (corresponding to instant cyclic phosphazene compound (C)).
König teaches that the disclosed molding composition has improved fire-protection classification of polyamide compositions, in particular after storage at elevated temperatures [0015-16].
With regard to the polyamide [instant A]:
König teaches that the polyamide is preferably from 55 to 80.3 wt% of the composition [0019], which encompasses the presently claimed range of 60-79 mass%. König further names several examples of suitable polyamides [0030-46] including several wherein the ratio of methylene:amide groups is 5 or more. PA 66, 610 and 6 are disclosed as preferred [0026], and König further names species recited in instant claim 16 (polyamide 11 [0045], polyamide 12 [0046], 612 [0036], 1212 [0038].
With regard to the phosphinic acid salt [instant B]:
The phosphinate salt range of 3 to 20 wt% disclosed by König [0056] encompasses the presently claimed range of 16-20 mass%. König discloses aluminum diethylphosphinate as particularly preferable [0061], which is the same type of phosphinic acid salt disclosed as preferred in the instant specification [0041].
With regard to the phosphazene compound [instant C]:
König discloses a cyclic phenoxyphosphazene in a range from 1 to 15 wt% [0053], which overlaps the presently claimed range of 5-20 mass%.
With regard to the plasticizer contained in an amount of 0 to 1 mass%:
König discloses that the composition can comprise 0 to 30% by weight of further additives, and names plasticizers within a list of examples of additives [0079]. However, the plasticizer is clearly disclosed as an optional component by König in [0079], and, in König’s exemplified compositions (see tables 1 and 3 on p 5), no plasticizer (i.e., 0 wt% of a plasticizer) is included.
Case law has established that a prima facie case of obviousness is established where the claimed ranges overlap the ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05. It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art, therefore, to have prepared a flame-retardant aliphatic polyamide molding composition comprising phosphinic acid salt, cyclic phosphazene and 0 wt% of a plasticizer, as disclosed by König ([0001, 0015, 0079]), by selecting any appropriate percentages of polyamide, phosphinic acid salt and cyclic phosphazene within the ranges disclosed by König, including percentages which fall within the presently claimed ranges, in order to provide a composition having improved fire-protection classification after storage at elevated temperatures.
As to claim 15, König exemplifies hexaphenoxycyclophosphazene as the cyclic phosphazene component [0093], which has a structure according to instant formula (3) wherein n is 3 and R1 is unsubstituted phenyl.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/16/2025 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues (pp 9-10) that the previously set forth rejection citing Bayer as a primary reference has been overcome in view of the amendment to claim 1 requiring 0 to 1 mass% of a plasticizer, because Bayer requires 3 to 15 wt% plasticizer. The examiner agrees, and the rejection has been withdrawn.
The rejection set forth above is substantially similar to the rejection over König in the action mailed on 5/9/2025.
Applicant argues (pp 9-10 of remarks dated 8/5/2025) that König’s exemplified compositions produce articles wherein the tensile elongation at break is ~3%, which is substantially lower than the tensile elongation at break percentages exhibited by test pieces formed from a composition in the instant examples (ranging from 42-200%). However, König’s example test pieces include 25% glass fiber and are formed from nylon-6,6, while the instant examples do not include any glass fiber and are formed from nylon-12. The instant claims do not exclude glass fibers from the composition, and, encompass compositions wherein the polyamide is nylon 6,6. Applicant has not established that claim 1 excludes a composition (such as one in which the polyamide is nylon-6,6 and which comprises glass fiber) which has properties as exhibited by König’s example compositions.
Alternatively, König names polyamide-12 as an example polyamide [0046], and, teaches that the compositions comprise 0 to 50 wt% glass fibers [0078], which means that König suggests a composition comprising polyamide-12 as the polyamide, and, which has 0 wt% glass fibers. Applicant has not established that the properties of a molding formed from a composition (as suggested by König) wherein the content of glass fibers is 0 wt% and wherein the polyamide component of the composition is polyamide-12 differ substantially from the properties of a molding according to the instant examples (wherein the polyamide component is polyamide-12 and wherein the composition is free of glass fibers).
Applicant further argues (p 10 of remarks dated 8/5/2025) that König’s examples 1-4 (see Table 2 of König) suggest a higher content of aliphatic polyamides results in lower UL94 classification. However, König’s examples appear to show that a higher UL94 classification is achieved as the content of cyclic phosphazene (which is disclosed for the purpose of improving fire-protection classification, when used in combination with Konig’s components C and D, [0015]) increases. Moreover, König’s test specimens for UL94 tests were moldings having thicknesses of 0.4 mm and 0.8 mm after 2 d at 23 C or after 7 d at 70 C. The instant test specimens were substantially thicker (1/16 inch), and no information is provided regarding the length or temperature of test specimen conditioning. It is therefore not possible to meaningfully compare the UL94 data for Konig’s examples with the UL94 data for the instant examples.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL KAHN whose telephone number is (571)270-7346. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8-5.
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, 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.
/RACHEL KAHN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights