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
Applicants Request for Continuing Examination was received on 11/11/2025. Claims 1-13, 16-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
In their response dated 11/11/2025 applicants argued following: (Note: arguments directed to advisory action are the same as those presented against final office action as such the arguments will be addressed only once)
While Jain teaches use of 30% of glass fibers, Schule does not include any fillers.
Schule was utilized as a secondary reference to meet the limitation of the condensation product of the secondary amine with ketone and the fact that the condensation product is a polyamide stabilizer. Schule was not utilized for its recitation of fillers.
Jain teaches molding composition used in injection molding while Schule teaches filler free polyamide.
Jain discloses composition for production of fibers, foils and molding (Abstract) as such Jain does not only make moldings using injection molding.
Schule teaches following:
PNG
media_image1.png
162
734
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As such Schule teaches molding composition as well as fibers made by extrusion. Additionally, as mentioned above, Schule was not utilized for its use of filler but for its use of stabilizer.
In summary the two disclosures are in fact in the same field of endeavor of making moldings or fibers comprising polyamide and utilizing compounds well known in stabilizing polyamide composition.
Jain, requires at least one amorphous oxide and/or oxide hydrate, while instant claim 1 as amended limits the additives to a selected group.
While additive is limited, the amorphous oxides and/or oxide hydrate are still encompassed by the instant claim in two ways.
First, instant claim recites term “comprising” which allows inclusion of any additional fillers, compounds or polymers.
Second, instant claim 1 is open to any particulate filler as component E.
The examiner would also point out that the gel component of Jain include compound like tetraethyl orthosilicates [0109] which upon condensation form porous nanoparticles with large pores and surface area [0113] with a large BET [0123-0124]. As such the porous nanoparticulates are encompassed by limitation of the particulate filler and the scope of the term “comprising”.
Historical sidebar: The reaction product of ketones and secondary amines is more than well established in the art. At the peak of great depression Mauzer (US 1,975,167) was the first patent to claim the compound, classified it as antioxidant. The condensation was catalyzed by heavy metal halide as a catalyst with metal iodide and metal bromide explicitly mentioned. Mouser followed up on his compound (US 2 002 642) and utilized it in rubber composition. The condensation reaction was catalyzed by acid hydrogen halide such as hydrochloric acid. This statement is included in DE document disclosed in the rejection indicating lack of copper. Within the same time Horst (US 1,906,935) utilized the same compound in order to prevent deterioration of rubber. The condensation was catalyzed by use of dehydrating catalyst such as iodine. In 1960s Mayberry (US 3,397,081) began using the compound with polyamides also as antioxidant.
Elmer Schule himself filed 2 patents directed at polycaproamide (Nylon) that are stabilized with the condensation product of secondary diamine and ketone as antioxidants (US 3,003,995 and US 3,113,120), both of which references are substantially similar to the utilized in the rejection German patent.
In summary, rejections of record are not overcome and are restated to reflect amendments to the claims.
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.
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 1-13, 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jain (US 2011/0021687) in view of Schule (DE 1152252 submitted by the applicants on 9/21/2022) and as evidenced by Mouser (US 2002642).
With respect to claim 1, Jain discloses composition comprising thermoplastic polyamide; polyethyleneimine to make fibers foils and moldings (Abstract).
The polyamide (component A) is utilized in amount of 50-99 % by weight,
The polyethyleneimine is utilized in amounts of 0.5-30% by weight [0021].
The amorphous oxide which undergoes condensation forms porous nanoparticle having high surface area and high BET is encompassed by term “particulate filler” and it is utilized in a range of 0.5-20 wt% (Abstract, [0021, 0108, 0113-0117, 0121, 0123-0124]
Glass fibers can be utilized in combination with particulate filler and are encompassed by “fibrous and/or particulate filler [0192-0193] wherein content of glass fibers is 1-70 wt% (claim 28).
Secondary diamine antioxidant in an amount of less than 2 wt% [0288]
For the purpose of claim 1 presence of lubricant and additives is viewed as optional.
In most preferred embodiment, polyamide is utilized in amount of 85-99.9 % by weight, polyethylene imine in amount of 0.05-10 % by weight [0024] in particular 93-99.9 % by weight of polyamide and 0.05-5 % by weight of polyethyleneimine. The polyamides of Jain include PA6 or nylon also known as polycaprolactam (Table 1).
The composition of Jain also comprises preferred stabilizers such as antioxidants which are secondary aromatic amines such based on diphenylamine. The amount of these stabilizers is up to 2% by weight, preferably 0.5-1.5 % by weight [0288].
While Jain discloses polycaprolactam composition stabilized by secondary aromatic amines, it does not teach a stabilizer that is a condensation product with aldehyde or ketone that can be further utilized in the teachings of Jain.
Schule discloses invention which is directed at stabilizing polycaprolactam wherein the stabilizing agent is based on secondary aromatic amines, wherein the amines listed in Schule are also the amines listed in Jain. The stabilizer of Schule is a condensation product of amine and ketone [0026]. This particular stabilizer is an antioxidant and Schule incorporates US 1,906,935 and specifically condensation of diphenyl amine and acetone and US 2,002,642 to teach condensation of the is typically accomplished by utilizing hydrogen halide such as hydrochloric acid. .
Schule teaches that using such condensation product the polycaprolactam has higher tensile strength [0058] and article has good antiaging properties.. In the light of the above disclosure it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to utilize well established condensation product of secondary amine with ketone as described in Schule in the teachings of Jain and thereby obtain the claimed invention.
Schule established in [0011] that amino compounds hare utilized in stabilizing polycaprolactam (nylon) however using compound that is condensation product of secondary amine and ketone, which is already established as an antioxidant, impart properties to the polyamide composition such as ageing inhibition [0019, 0050] when evenly distributed through the polyamide composition [0020] for both fibers and molded article. The compositions incorporating such antioxidant have improved pot life and water/moisture resistance [0049, 0051] as well as tear resistance [0051]. The condensation product of Schule is functional equivalent to the stabilizer of Jain with respect to stabilizing polycaprolactam compositions.
The combination of two known compositions is expected to work in additive or cumulative manner. In re Kerkhoven 626 E.2d 846, 850 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980).
It is well settled that it is prima facie obvious to combine two ingredients, each of which is targeted by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose. In re Linder 457 F,2d 506,509, 173 USPQ 356, 359 (CCPA 1972).
The rest of the components in instant claim 1 have lower limit of 0, which renders them optional.
With respect to claim 2, polyethyleneimines of Jain are homopolymers or copolymers [0058, 0059]. If copolymers the comonomer comprises diamines [0060]. Polyethyleneimine can also be crosslinked [0063] or grafted [0064]
With respect to claims 3, 16 and 17, polyethyleneimines have weight average molecular weight in a range of 100-3,000,000 g/mol [0061-0062].
With respect to claim 4, preferred weight average molecular weight of polyethyleneimine is in a range of 500-50,000 g/mol [0061-0062].
With respect to claims 5, 9, 18 and 19, composition of Jain utilizes lubricants in amount of up to 3 % by weight [0220]. Lubricants are selected from alkaline earth metal salts of aluminum as well as aluminum stearate [0222], amides [0225]. Preferred amount of lubricants is 0.05-3 % by weight.
With respect to claim 6, Jain does not teach metal halides.
With respect to claim 7, as it was mentioned above, incorporated by Schule reference teaches condensation product of diphenyl amine and acetone. Further modification with formaldehyde is also enabled [0052].
With respect to claim 8, as it was mentioned above, Jain teaches secondary aromatic amine stabilizers as antioxidant.
With respect to claims 10, 20 and 21, Jain discloses use of glass fibers [0195, 01960334] utilized in the composition in an amount of 1-70 % by weight (claim 28).
With respect to claim 11, the composition is made by blending all components by first creating a masterbatch and followed by addition of additives [0339-0340].
With respect to claims 12 and 13, method of Jain is using the composition as foil, fiber and molding (claim 40).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATARZYNA I KOLB whose telephone number is (571)272-1127. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at 5712701046. 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.
/KATARZYNA I KOLB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767 January 13, 2026