DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 9, 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 16 have been amended. Claims 1, 4-8, 10-17 and 19-20 are currently pending and under examination.
The texts of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code are not included in this section and can be found in a prior Office action.
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 § 102
Claims 1, 4, 10-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 106189607, as evidenced by Winterowd (US 2014/0295561) and JP 7212252 and JP 2019-167493. For convenience, the machine translations of CN ‘607, JP ‘252 and JP ‘493 will be cited below.
CN ‘607 discloses a primer-topcoat paint exemplified as comprising water, 34 parts pure acrylic emulsion and 6 parts covering polymer, described as Celocor, which as evidenced by Winterowd is a styrene acrylic dispersion.
The pure acrylic polymer meets applicants’ first acrylic copolymer and the covering polymer meets applicants’ second acrylic copolymer, where the first copolymer is present in an amount of more than 5 times greater than that of the styrene acrylic copolymer.
Note that the parts add up to 100 parts, therefore the parts by weight are the same as weight percent.
CN ‘607 anticipates instant claim 1.
As to claims 4 and 17, CN ‘607 describes the pure acrylic emulsion as Rahm and Haas 2471, which has a Tg of -23°C as evidenced by JP ‘252. (Meth)acrylic emulsions with a negative Tg have a MFT=0°C, as evidenced by JP ‘493.
As to claims 11-12, CN ‘607 exemplifies the inclusion of a silicon oxide matting powder.
As to claims 10 and 13, CN ‘607 exemplifies the inclusion of 1 parts polyether type associative thickener, which meets applicants’ rheology modifier; 0.6 parts dispersant CA2500, which meets applicants’ surfactant; 0.15 parts silicon defoaming agent and 0.6 part mineral oil defoaming agent; 0.5 part film forming agent lauryl alcohol ester, which meets applicants’ coalescent; 0.1 part bactericide, which meets applicants’ biocide; 0.5 part mildew-proof and anti-algae agent, which meets applicants’ mildewcide; 0.12 parts pH regulator; 6 parts covering polymer which meets applicants’ opaque polymer and 1 part silica matting, 5 parts mica, and 12 parts calcium carbonate powder, all of which meet applicants’ matting agent.
As to claims 14-15, CN ‘607 exemplifies the inclusion of 15 parts titanium dioxide.
As to claim 16, CN ‘607 discloses that the paint is coated onto a surface and naturally dried. Additionally, the inclusion of 6 parts of the covering polymer meets the claimed limitation of “about 6.05” wt% of the second acrylic copolymer.
Claims 19-20 can be similarly rejected as claims 10 and 13-14, above.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 106189607, as applied above to claims 1, 4, 10-17 and 19-20, and further in view of CN 106459647 and/or Sadasivan (US 2013/0296461). For convenience, the machine translation of CN ‘607 will be cited below.
CN ‘607 anticipates instant claims 1, 4, 10-17 and 19-20, as described above and applied herein as such, as CN ‘607 discloses an aqueous primer-topcoat elastic paint comprising a pure acrylic resin in an amount of more than 5 times greater than that of a styrene acrylic resin.
As to claims 5-8, CN ‘607 teaches the emulsion to include pure acrylic resin and the covering polymer is known as a styrene acrylic resin; however, CN ‘607 does not teach or suggest suitable monomers which can be used to prepare such.
“Pure acrylic” is used in the art to suggest a copolymer comprising nearly all acrylic monomers. Pure acrylic resins used in the art of latex paints can include monomers such as butyl acrylate, methyl methacrylate, and 2-hexylacrylate, and provide a low Tg of less than 10°C, and styrene acrylic resins use similar monomers but include styrene, as taught by Sadasivan (p. 4, [0052], p. 7, [0107], and p. 10 [0167]). CN ‘647 teaches pure acrylics and styrene acrylics and how to manipulate the molar content of the monomers to obtain the desired Tg of the copolymers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used a combination of butyl acrylate, methyl methacrylate, and/or 2-hexylacrylate to prepare the pure acrylic with a low Tg and styrene with butyl acrylate, methyl methacrylate, and/or 2-hexylacrylate to prepare the styrene acrylic copolymer, as these copolymers are very well known in the art, pure acrylics and styrene acrylic copolymers are widely used in the art of latex paints, and Sadasivan and CN ‘647 as to how to prepare such copolymers for use in latex paints.
CN ‘607 in view of Sadasivan and/or CN ‘647 is prima facie obvious over instant claims 5-8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 9, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue that the covering polymer of CN ‘607 is in the form of a hollow microsphere rather than a film forming binder.
While the examiner agrees, applicants only claim a combination of copolymers. The language of the claimed subject matter does not patentably distinguish them from the prior art references, as applicants do not claim the second acrylic copolymer as a film-forming binder resin, nor do the claims differentiate between the second acrylic copolymer and the opacifying polymer.
Applicants argue that the combination of binders copolymers results in an unexpected combination of primer and topcoat properties.
Again, applicants do not claim the first and second copolymers as film-forming binders. Additionally, the examples are not sufficient to show any unexpected properties because the examples do not show a combination of first and second copolymers. The examples simply disclose “Polymer-Acrylic” without any further description of the makeup of such.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIEANN R JOHNSTON whose telephone number is (571)270-7344. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM EST.
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.
/Brieann R Johnston/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766