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 .
This communication is responsive to the claim set filed 02/06/2026. Claims 1-17 are pending and under consideration.
The 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections dated 11/06/2025 are WITHDRAWN due to Applicant’s amendments.
Claims 1-17 are rejected for the reasons set forth below.
The new ground of rejection is necessitated by applicant’s amendments, e.g., the flame retardant (B) has been further limited to comprising a salt of (poly)phosphoric acid and a nitrogen compound, wherein the nitrogen compound includes melamine or piperazine.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nakamura et al. (US2023/0068325 A1; EFD: 2020-01-20).
Regarding Claim 1, Nakamura teaches a flame retardant resin composition comprising a synthetic resin, a phosphate-based flame retardant, and acid-modified polyolefins (claim 8). The Examples 2-2 and 2-3 compositions comprising polypropylene copolymer, melamine pyrophosphate and piperazine pyrophosphate, and maleic anhydride-modified polypropylene (mw=30,000 ([0141]). Data of the compositions are copied below.
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The ratio of flame retardants of the polypropylene copolymer of each composition is 48% by mass and the ratio of the maleic anhydride-modified polypropylene to flame retardants is 3.1 % by mass. Both ratios fall within the claimed ranges.
Regarding Claim 2, as shown by the table above, each composition comprising 66.7 mass% of polypropylene copolymer.
Regarding Claim 3, the exemplary composition comprising maleic anhydride-modified polypropylene which is a copolymer of maleic anhydride and polypropylene.
Regarding Claim 4, the exemplary composition comprising polypropylene copolymer.
Regarding Claim 5, Nakamura teaches a molded product comprising the flame retardant resin composition (claim 11).
Regarding Claims 6-8, the limitations have been addressed in Claims 2-4 above.
Regarding Claims 9-11, the limitations have been addressed in claims 2-4 and 5.
Regarding Claims 12-14, the mass ratio of flame retardants to polypropylene copolymer of each exemplary composition is 48%, falling within each claimed range.
Regarding Claims 15-17, the mass ratio of polypropylene copolymer to total mass of the resin composition of each exemplary composition is 66.7%, falling within each claimed range.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 HUIHONG QIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-8315. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM.
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.
/HUIHONG QIAO/ Examiner, Art Unit 1763
/CATHERINE S BRANCH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights