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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior office action.
All outstanding rejections, except for those maintained below, are withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendment filed on 4/15/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 1-8 12-16, and 19-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tam (Tam, et al., Journal of Polymer Science: Part B: Polymer Physics Vol. 35, 2275-2990 (1998)) in view of Greenblatt (US 6,063,857).
With respect to claims 1, 3, 4, 14-16, and 25, Tam discloses an associative polymer, i.e., a hydrophobically modified alkali-soluble polymer (HASE), for use in water-based applications (page 2275, first column) having structure
PNG
media_image1.png
280
320
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 2277), wherein R is C32C65 and P of 2.5, 10, or 40 ethylene oxide units (page 2279, Table 1). This formula falls within the scope of claimed monomers (a1) methacrylic acid, (a2) ethyl acrylate, and (a3) having R = C32C65; m = 2.5, 10, or 40; and n = 0. The step of adding the polymer to a water-based system meets the claimed step of “combining.” Also, he preamble of “for improving resistance to temperature variations in an aqueous composition” is functional language, i.e., is Tam’s associative polymer capable of resisting temperature variations? It is the examiner’s position that it is. Tam explains activation energy, measured from viscosity decreases with increased temperatures, is a measure of the energy barrier for the dissociation of hydrophobic end groups from a junction and generally correlates to the strength of the network junction (page 2285, paragraph after eq (9)). In Table 1 on page 2279, the HASE copolymers have an activation energy Em that is higher than the comparative associative polymer, which strongly suggests that the resistance to temperature variations is improved by using HASE compared to non-HASE copolymer.
Tam discloses that the HASE copolymer are derived from 56 mol % methacrylic acid (claimed (a1)), 42 mol % ethyl acrylate (claimed (a2)), and 2 mol % hydrophobic macromonomer (claimed (a3)) (page 2277, second column). For polymer HASE 5141 in Table 1 having 2.5 ethylene oxide groups, the amount in mol % is converted to wt % based on molecular weights of each monomer to 47 wt % of methacrylic acid, 41 wt % of ethyl acrylate, and 12 wt % of hydrophobic macromonomer. For polymer HASE 5134 having 10 ethylene oxide groups, the amount in mol % is converted to wt % to 44 wt % of methacrylic acid, 38 wt % of ethyl acrylate, and 18 wt % of associative monomer. For polymer HASE 5142 having 40 ethylene oxide groups, the amount in mol % is converted to 35 wt % methacrylic acid, 31 wt % ethyl acrylate, and 34 wt % hydrophobic macromonomer.
None of of these exemplified HASE copolymers anticipates the claimed combination of amounts of 20-40 wt % monomer (a1), 43-79.5 wt % monomer (a2), and 0.5-12 wt % monomer (a3).
Greenblatt discloses aqueous solutions of hydrophobically-modified alkali-soluble emulsion polymer (HASE) abstract) and teaches that effective HASE polymers include 5-75 wt % anionic monomer (claimed (a1)), 30-75 wt % nonionic monomer (claimed (a2)), and 1-20 wt % of the hydrophobic macromonomer (claimed (a3)).
While Tam has limited its disclosure to one combination of amounts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to look to other equivalent HASE copolymers in the prior art such as by Greenblatt to reduce the amount of anionic monomer (claimed (a1)) and increase the amount of nonionic monomer (claimed (a2)) in the HASE copolymer so that the amounts of claimed (a1), (a2), and (a3) are within the claimed ranges with the expectation of success to the copolymers exemplified by Tam—absent a showing of unexpected or surprising results.
With respect to claims 2 and 13, Tam teaches that applications utilizing the associative thickener includes coatings, paints, adhesives, and personal care articles (page 2276, second column).
With respect to claim 5, Tam fails to disclose monomer other than those in in the structure on page 2277 and fails to disclose the addition of other reactcive monomers.
Greenblatt teaches that suitable HASE copolymers can include a chain transfer agent to control the molecular weight of the HASE copolymer (col. 3, lines 40-46). Greenblatt also teaches that polyethylenically unsaturated copolymerizable monomers may be used in the HASE copolymer to provide crosslinking (col. 3, lines 47-53).
Given that both Tam and Greenblatt are drawn to HASE copolymers and further given that Greenblatt teaches that chain transfer agents and crosslinking monomers are appropriately used in HASE copolymers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize those monomers in Tam’s polymer in up to an amount that does not disrupt the advantages taught by Tam.
With respect to claim 6, Tam shows in Figure 5 the effects of pH which neutralizes carboxyl groups when pH is increased.
With respect to claim 7, Tam shows in Figure 5 amounts of polymer of 0.1-5 wt %.
With respect to claims 8 and 21-24, Tam fails to disclose the change in viscosity for temperature range of 5-50°C measured for a shear gradient of 0.1-1,000 s-1.
Tam discloses viscosity on a shear gradient based on pH (see Figure 4 on page 2280) and shows how the viscosity of Tam’s HASE copolymers 5141, 5134, and 5142 are not significantly affected when the concentration is low, e.g., 0.1 wt % (see Figure 6 on page 2282). Tam also explains that having a high content of ethylene oxide in the hydrophobic comonomer of 5-40 mol EO provides increased intermolecular interaction with reduced coiling of polymer chains and a stronger network both in terms of viscosity and activation energy (page 2283-2285). Also, in Figure 10, HASE 5134 with 10 ethylene is the most stable of all associative copolymers and stability across 1000/T of 3.2-3.5 which is equivalent to 12-40°C.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide an aqueous composition through routine optimization having the claimed change in viscosity within 5-50°C because Tam teaches that stability is had across shear rates and that solution strength is optimized when using a HASE copolymer having ethylene oxide content of 5-40 mol, in particularly 10 mol ethylene oxide.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to prepare an aqueous composition which has a viscosity that does not significantly decrease as the temperature is increased from 5 to 50°C.
With respect to claim 12, the “varnish composition” is intended use. Because Tam discloses the use of the polymer in coatings, it is capable of being used in a varnish.
With respect to claim 19, Tam does not disclose that R2 that is C32H65 is branched. Even so, case law holds that compounds which are position isomers (compounds having the same radicals in physically different positions on the same nucleus) are generally of sufficiently close structural similarity that there is a presumed expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. In re Wilder, 563 F.2d 457, 195 USPQ 426 (CCPA 1977).
Given that C32H65 represents both a straight and a branched C-32-alkyl group, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a branched C-32-alkyl group.
With respect to claim 20, Tam shows a plurality of pH value for the associative polymer (i.e., claimed (P)) (Figure 4), including those would partially coacervate the associative polymer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection set forth above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICKEY NERANGIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2701. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:00 pm EST, Monday - Friday.
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.
/VICKEY NERANGIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
vn
Prosecution Insights