DETAILED ACTION
Summary
Applicant’s amendment dated 18 November 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 5-6 and 10-11 are pending.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
New grounds for rejection are necessitated by the amendment dated 18 November 2025. For this reason, this action is properly made final.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1, 5-6 and 10-11 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, Claim 1 recites the broad recitation of a styrene based resin, and the claim also recites that the content of the rubbery polymer in the styrene-based resin is “preferably” 3-20 mass% which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Claims 5-6 and 10-11 are also rejected because they depend upon, and therefore include Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 5-6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TOYAMA (US-20150025181-A1) in view of XALTER (US-20110237715-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, TOYAMA teaches a polystyrene-based resin composition (Abstract) with an amount of 4-t-butylcatechol per 1 g of styrene-based resin of 1-6 µg (Abstract). TOYAMA teaches an amount of dimers and trimers of 5000 µg or less per 1 g of styrene resin ([0042], Claim 3). TOYAMA teaches many examples with an amount of t-butyl catechol (TBC)([0040]) and dimers/trimers within the recited range (Table 1, Table 2).
The claim recites either a styrene copolymer or a styrene resin in particles of a rubbery polymer (a) are dispersed. Only one of them is required. TOYAMA teaches that its polystyrene-based may contain comonomers such as (meth)acrylic acid esters and (meth)acrylic acid or maleic acid, fumaric acid which can be used alone or in combinations of two or more ([0025]). These are all unsaturated carboxylic acid or unsaturated carboxylic acid ester monomers which would satisfy the requirement of the claim. TOYOMA teaches that its resin contains the styrene-based monomer in an amount of 50 mass% or more ([0025]). This 50-100 mass% range taught by TOYOMA encompasses the 69-98 mass% that is recited by the claim. TOYOMA does not exemplify a comonomer, but it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the invention of TOYOMA and include styrene-based monomers and comonomers in its copolymer in amounts that are within the range taught by TOYOMA that are also within the range recited by the claim. It is well settled that where the prior art describes the components of a claimed compound or compositions in concentrations within or overlapping the claimed concentrations a prima facie case of obviousness is established. See In re Harris, 409 F.3d 1339, 1343, 74 USPQ2d 1951, 1953 (Fed. Cir 2005); In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1329, 65 USPQ 2d 1379, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936-37 (CCPA 1990); In re Malagari, 499 F.2d 1297, 1303, 182 USPQ 549, 553 (CCPA 1974). For more discussion see MPEP 2144.05-I.
TOYAMA does not teach the dielectric properties of its composition, but TOYAMA teaches very similar compositions as those in the instant examples. TOYAMA teaches examples without comonomers (Example 1 ([0110]-([0111])) which use the same input components reacted in the same manner and obtaining the same TBC concentration as what is used to create component GPPS-A in the instant examples (cur spec: [0163]) which represents the composition in instant Example 1 (cur spec: Table 2-1) which has dielectric constant of 2.3 and a dielectric loss constant of 0.0005 (cur spec: Table 2-1). TOYOMA generally teaches comonomers such as methyl methacrylate and methacrylic acid in amounts of 0-50 mass% ([0025]) which are the same comonomers used in the instant examples in amounts ranging from 8.2-25.3 mass% (cur spec: Table 1). Note that the instant examples do not show a large effect on the dielectric properties when these comonomers are added (compare instant Examples 1, 3, 15, 17 and 19 where the dielectric constant is between 2.3 and 2.6 and the dielectric loss tangent is between 0.0005 and 0.0032). The claim recites 69-98 mass% of the styrene-based monomers so only 2-31 mass% of comonomers are required. One would inherently expect that the obvious modification to the exemplary compositions taught by TOYAMA using comonomers such as methacrylic acid and methyl methacrylic in amounts as low as the recited 2 mass% limit would have a dielectric constant and dielectric loss tangent within the recited range.
TOYAMA further teaches that various additives may be added to its composition, such as a flame retardant ([0054]). TOYAMA is silent on the type of flame retardant to use for its composition. XALTER, in an invention of a flame retardant for compositions based on thermoplastic polymers (Abstract), which includes polystyrene ([0149]) and styrene-based homopolymers and copolymers ([0150], [0151]), teaches a flame retardant based on mixtures of a) salts of phosphinic acids and b) 2,2,6,6,-tetraalkylpiperidines (Abstract, [0009], [0018]). The salts of phosphinic acids satisfies the requirement of a phosphorus-based compound. XALTER teaches that tetraalkylpiperidine compounds are known as N-alkoxy hindered amines and NOR-hindered amines ([0083]). XALTER teaches that its flame retardants provide excellent flame retardant properties ([0005]) while complying with increased safety and environment standards ([0004]) and allow for the replacement of halogen-containing flame retardants ([0007]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the invention of TOYAMA with the teachings of XALTER and use a flame retardant containing a mixture of phosphinic acid salts and hindered amines for the purpose of providing excellent flame retardant properties while complying with increased safety and environmental standards.
Regarding Claim 5, modified TOYOMA teaches the invention of Claim 1 where XALTER teaches a flame retardant based on mixtures of a) salts of phosphinic acids and b) 2,2,6,6,-tetraalkylpiperidines (Abstract, [0009], [0018]). XALTER teaches that the phosphinic acid salt component a) is present in amounts of 0.1-45 wt%, preferably 0.1-30 wt% ([0209]) which overlaps the 1.0-20.0 mass percent which is recited by the claim. XALTER further teaches that the tetraalkylpiperidine derivative component b) is present in amounts of 0.05-5wt%, preferably 0.1-2.0wt% ([0209]) which overlaps the 0.2-3.0 mass% recited by the claim. XALTER teaches admixing these components into the thermoplastic polymer substrate c) ([0209]). The sum of the preferable ranges for a) and b) taught by XALTER calculates to 0.2-32wt%, which corresponds to a remaining amount of the thermoplastic polymer of 68-99.8wt% which encompasses the 77.0-98.0 mass% which is recited by the claim. XALTER teaches that its flame retardants provide excellent flame retardant properties ([0005]) while complying with increased safety and environment standards ([0004]) and allow for the replacement of halogen-containing flame retardants ([0007]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the invention of TOYAMA with the teachings of XALTER and use a flame retardant containing a mixture of phosphinic acid salts and hindered amines in the amounts taught by XALTER that are also within the range recited by the claim for the purpose of providing excellent flame retardant properties while complying with increased safety and environmental standards.
Regarding Claim 6, TOYAMA teaches the invention of Claim 1 where TOYAMA teaches examples which only contain the styrene monomer ([0110]) and are presumed to be thermoplastic. The instant specification discloses that thermoplastic styrene-based resin is defined as containing less than 4.5 mass% of a crosslinkable aromatic vinyl compound having two or more vinyl groups as a crosslinking component (cur spec: [0051]). TOYOMA teaches modification of its composition with comonomers ([0025]) but TOYOMA does not teach crosslinkable monomers ([0025]).
Regarding Claim 10, modified TOYOMA teaches the invention of Claim 1. Claim 10 recites a limitation on the rubber polymer (a) which is an optional component of Claim 1. So, modified TOYOMA satisfies the limitations of Claim 1 without the rubber polymer (a) component automatically satisfies Claim 10.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TOYAMA (US-20150025181-A1) in view of XALTER (US-20110237715-A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of OGATA (WO-2011162306-A1).
Regarding Claim 11, modified TOYAMA teaches the invention of Claim 1 above. TOYAMA teaches a polymerization method which is very close to that disclosed in the instant specification, using the same 1-1-bis(t-butylperoxy)cyclohexane, the same flow rates and the same flow reactor temperatures and the same resulting t-butyl catechol (TBC) amounts (compare TOYAMA [0110]-[0111]) to cur spec: [0163]). Since TOYOMA teaches that t-butyl catechol is a polymerization inhibitor ([0028]) and the same amounts are found remaining after the same processes are performed, one would inherently expect the same degree of polymerization, and therefore the same weight average molecular weight of its product, would be obtained. To the extent that TOYAMA does not teach a weight average molecular weight of its styrene-based reins, OGATA, in an invention of a styrene resin (Abstract) with a low amount of dimers and trimers (p. 3, 4th par from bottom) and an amount of t-butylcatechol which is less than 10 µg/g, preferably less than 3 µg/g, teaches that its resin has a weight average molecular weight of 150,000 to 450,000 (Abstract), preferably 200,000 to 400,000 (p. 3, par. 4) which overlaps the recited range of 100,000 to 350,000. OGATA teaches that when the weight average molecular weight is less than 150,000 the strength of the molded product decreases, while when the molecular weight exceeds 450,000, the melt mass flow rate may be lowered and moldability may be deteriorated (p. 3, par. 4). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the invention of TOYAMA with the teachings of OGATA and use a styrene-based resin within a weight average molecular weight within the range taught by TOYAMA that is also within the range recited by the claim for the purpose of balancing strength and moldability.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 18 November 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The amendment to the specification has added explanation for label “A” in Fig. 5. The objection to the specification has been withdrawn.
The amendment cancels the previously withdrawn Claims 7-9.
The amendment to Claim 1 includes use of the indefinite term “preferably”. A rejection under 35 USC 112(b) has been added for this claim and its dependent claims.
Applicant argues that TOYAMA is directed to a different field of endeavor as the instant application. In response, the claims are directed to a styrene-based resin composition. There is nothing recited about applications or even intended use of the styrene-based resin compositions. TOYOMA teaches styrene-based resin compositions which satisfy all of the structural limitations of Claim 1 and its compositions would inherently have the same dielectric properties as the instant examples as the exemplary compositions are very close. Applicant argues that TOYOMA and XALTER cannot be combined as they are not analogous art and that TOYAMA teaches away from XALTER as TOYAMA is directed to a light guide plate with improved optical transmittance and color tone and XALTER teaches flame retardant compounds which are not colorless and transparent. In response, TOYAMA teaches high transmittance, but does not mention transparency. TOYAMA teaches many non-transparent additives ([0054]) including a dye or pigment ([0054]). Applicant points out tetraalkylpiperidine derivatives taught by XALTER, including 2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperdine, as not being suitable for inclusion in the invention of TOYAMA, but TOYAMA teaches bis(2,2,6,6-tetramethy 1-4-piperidyl)sebacate as a suitable photostabilizer for its composition in amounts as high as 2 mass% ([0054]). XALTER teaches flame retardants for thermoplastic resins. TOYAMA teaches a styrene-based resin, which is thermoplastic, which can contain a flame retardant. It would be obvious to modify the invention of TOYAMA with the teachings of XALTER and use the recited combination of flame retardants for the purpose of providing excellent flame retardant properties while complying with increased safety and environmental standards.
Conclusion
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 R FOSS whose telephone number is (571)272-4821. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 5:00.
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, ARRIE L REUTHER can be reached at (571)270-7026. 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.
/D.R.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1764
/KREGG T BROOKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764