DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 12/31/2025.
3. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-18 are pending. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-18 are under examination on the merits. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-18 are amended. Claims 3, 7-8 are cancelled.
4. The objections and rejections not addressed below are deemed withdrawn.
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-18 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-18 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “A heat transfer blend comprising: from 1 wt% to 98 wt% of 1-chloro-1,2 difluoroethylene (HFO-1122a), from 1 wt% to 98 wt% of 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234yf)”, wherein applicant fails to articulate by sufficiently distinct functional language, if the recited wt% is based on a total weight of the heat transfer blend or is based on a total weight of the hydrofluorocarbon, thus claim 1 constitutes indefinite subject matter as per the metes and bounds of said phrase engenders indeterminacy in scope. Claims 2, 4-6, 9-18 being depended on claim 1 are rejected as well.
For the purpose of examination against the prior art, claim 1 is construed to recites ”wherein the wt% is based on a total weight of the heat transfer blend”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
9. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerin et al. (US Pub. No. 2016/0194541 A1, hereinafter “’541”) in view of Yotsumoto et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0148929 A1, hereinafter “’929”)
Regarding claim 1: ‘541 teaches composition comprising 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y),1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a) and polyalkylene glycol (Page 1, [0015]). The 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y), 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane and the polyalkylene glycol represent at least 95%, preferably at least 99% and more particularly preferably at least 99.9% of the composition (Page 1, [0016]). The composition comprises from 1% to 99% of polyalkylene glycol, preferably from 5% to 50%, more particularly preferably from 10% to 40% and ideally from 15% to 35% (Page 1, [0017]), and the mass ratio between 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y) and 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a) is from 1/99 to 99/1, preferably from 25/75 to 95/5, more particularly preferably from 50/50 to 92/8 and ideally from 55/45 to 92/8 (Page 1, [0018]). ‘541 does not expressly teach from 1 wt% to 98 wt% of 1-chloro-1,2 difluoroethylene (HFO- 122a).
However, ‘929 teaches a refrigerant composition comprising FO-1216 (perfluoro propylene such as hexafluoropropylene, Page 1, [0009]) and a halogenated ethylene (Page 1, [0018]; Page 2, [0025]; Page 20, Claim 6), wherein the FO-1216 is present in an amount of 10 mol % or more based on the total amount of the FO-1216 and the halogenated ethylene taken as 100 mol % (Page 1, [0019]; Page 20, Claim 20) and wherein the halogenated ethylene is at least one member selected from the group consisting of HCFO-1122a, FO-1114, HFO-1123, HFO-1132(E), HFO-1132(Z), HFO-1132a, and HFO-1141 (Page 2, [0025]; Page 20, Claim 8), wherein the blend exhibits a global warming potential (GWP) of less than 200 (Page 2, [0041]; Page 3, [0052]) with benefit of providing the refrigerant composition having a low GWP, is non-flammable or mildly flammable, and has a refrigerating capacity (Cap) and/or coefficient of performance (COP) equivalent to or higher than those of traditional refrigerants (Page 1, [0002]; Page 2, [0032]).
In an analogous art of the heat transfer composition, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heat transfer composition by ‘541, so as to include from 1 wt% to 98 wt% of 1-chloro-1,2 difluoroethylene (HFO- 122a) as taught by ‘929, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing the refrigerant composition having a low GWP, is non-flammable or mildly flammable, and has a refrigerating capacity (Cap) and/or coefficient of performance (COP) equivalent to or higher than those of traditional refrigerants as suggested by ‘929 (Page 1, [0002]; Page 2, [0032]).
It is held that it is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose.... [T]he idea of combining them flows logically from there having been individually taught in the prior art.” In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850,205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 2: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 teaches a heat transfer system selected from the group consisting of a refrigeration system, an air-conditioning system, a heating system and a chilling system containing the heat transfer blend (Page 1, [0003]).
‘929 teaches a heat transfer system selected from the group consisting of a refrigeration system, an air-conditioning system, a heating system and a chilling system containing the heat transfer blend (Page 1, [0002]).
Regarding claim 4: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 teaches composition comprising 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y),1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a) and polyalkylene glycol (Page 1, [0015]).
‘929 teaches a refrigerant composition comprising FO-1216 (perfluoro propylene such as hexafluoropropylene, Page 1, [0009]) and a halogenated ethylene (Page 1, [0018]; Page 2, [0025]; Page 20, Claim 6), wherein the halogenated ethylene is at least one member selected from the group consisting of HCFO-1122a, FO-1114, HFO-1123, HFO-1132(E), HFO-1132(Z), HFO-1132a, and HFO-1141 (Page 2, [0025]; Page 20, Claim 8).
Regarding claim 5: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 teaches composition comprising 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y),1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a) and polyalkylene glycol (Page 1, [0015]).
Regarding claim 6: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘929 teaches a refrigerant composition comprising FO-1216 (perfluoro propylene such as hexafluoropropylene, Page 1, [0009]) and a halogenated ethylene (Page 1, [0018]; Page 2, [0025]; Page 20, Claim 6), wherein the halogenated ethylene is at least one member selected from the group consisting of HCFO-1122a, FO-1114, HFO-1123, HFO-1132(E), HFO-1132(Z), HFO-1132a, and HFO-1141 (Page 2, [0025]; Page 20, Claim 8).
Regarding claim 9: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 teaches composition comprising 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y),1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a) and polyalkylene glycol (Page 1, [0015]). The 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y), 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane and the polyalkylene glycol represent at least 95%, preferably at least 99% and more particularly preferably at least 99.9% of the composition (Page 1, [0016]). The composition comprises from 1% to 99% of polyalkylene glycol, preferably from 5% to 50%, more particularly preferably from 10% to 40% and ideally from 15% to 35% (Page 1, [0017]), and the mass ratio between 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y) and 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a) is from 1/99 to 99/1, preferably from 25/75 to 95/5, more particularly preferably from 50/50 to 92/8 and ideally from 55/45 to 92/8 (Page 1, [0018]) encompass a combined amount from 1 % to 50% by weight, based on a total weight of the heat transfer blend.
Regarding claim 10: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 teaches the mass ratio between 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234y) and 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a) is from 1/99 to 99/1, preferably from 25/75 to 95/5, more particularly preferably from 50/50 to 92/8 and ideally from 55/45 to 92/8 (Page 1, [0018]).
Regarding claim 11: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference.’541 teaches a heat transfer composition comprising the heat transfer blend, further comprising a lubricant (Page 2, [0021]).
Regarding claim 12: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 teaches the heat transfer composition, where the lubricant is selected from polyol ester oils, polyglycols, polyalkylene glycols, polyvinyl ethers, mineral oils, alkyl benzene oils, polyalpha olefins, and mixtures thereof (Page 2, 0022]).
Regarding claim 13: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 teaches the heat transfer composition, where the lubricant is selected from polyol ester oils, mineral oils, alkyl benzene oils, and mixtures thereof (Page 3, [0064]).
10. Claims 14-16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerin et al. (US Pub. No. 2016/0194541 A1, hereinafter “’541”) in view of Yotsumoto et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0148929 A1, hereinafter “’929”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Taniguchi et al. (US Pub. No. 2016/0002518 A1, hereinafter “’518”).
Regarding claims 14-16,18: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph 9 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 in view of ‘929 does not expressly teach a sprayable or a polymer foam made using the blowing agent or an aerosol composition comprising the heat transfer blend.
However, teaches a composition (Page 1, [0001]). containing HFO-1123 having a low GWP, useful as a heat transfer composition, an aerosol sprayer, a foaming agent, a blowing agent, a solvent or the like (Page 1, [0008]) with benefit of providing a composition comprising HFO-1123 which has been used for a refrigerating and heat transfer fluid, an aerosol spray, a foaming/expanding agent and the like, and in recent years, it is expected to be promising as an alternative to a saturated HFC (hydrofluorocarbon) type refrigerant having a high GWP (Page 1, [0004]).
In an analogous art of the heat transfer composition, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the heat transfer composition by ‘541, so as to include a sprayable or a polymer foam made using the blowing agent or an aerosol composition comprising the heat transfer blend as taught by ‘518, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing a composition comprising HFO-1123 which has been used for a refrigerating and heat transfer fluid, an aerosol spray, a foaming/expanding agent and the like, and in recent years, it is expected to be promising as an alternative to a saturated HFC (hydrofluorocarbon) type refrigerant having a high GWP as suggested by ‘518 (Page 1, [0004]).
Thus, the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, since apply the heat transfer composition of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is within the level ordinary skill in the art.
11. Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerin et al. (US Pub. No. 2016/0194541 A1, hereinafter “’541”) in view of Yotsumoto et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0148929 A1, hereinafter “’929”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nappa et al. (US Pub. No. 2018/0002507 A1, hereinafter “’507”).
Regarding claims 15-17: The disclosure of ‘541 in view of ‘929 is adequately set forth in paragraph 9 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘541 in view of ‘929 does not expressly teach a polymer foam made using the blowing agent, and a propellant composition comprising the heat transfer composition.
However, ‘507 teaches a polymer foam made using the blowing agent (Page 4, [0134]; Page 4, [0136]; Page 5, [0156]-[0157]; Page 9, Claim 18), and a propellant composition comprising the heat transfer composition (Page 5, [0158]; Page 6, [0159]; Page 9, Claim 19) with benefit of providing a need for new compositions for use in refrigeration, air-conditioning, heat pump and power cycle apparatus and many other areas of use due to the new environmental regulations, and furthermore the low global warming potential compounds are of particular interest (Page 1, [0002]).
In an analogous art of the heat transfer composition, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the heat transfer composition by ‘541, so as to include polymer foam made using the blowing agent, and a propellant composition comprising the heat transfer composition as taught by ‘507, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing a need for new compositions for use in refrigeration, air-conditioning, heat pump and power cycle apparatus and many other areas of use due to the new environmental regulations, and furthermore the low global warming potential compounds are of particular interest as suggested by ‘507 (Page 1, [0002]).
Thus, the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, since apply the heat transfer composition of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is within the level ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
12. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-18 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
13. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Examiner Information
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bijan Ahvazi, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571) 270-3449. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9.00 A.M. -7 P.M..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Bijan Ahvazi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
01/27/2026
bijan.ahvazi@uspto.gov