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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/09/2023, 07/15/2024, 11/14/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: p.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 7 of claim 17 reads "the gel fraction is represented by following formula". This should read "the gel fraction is represented by the following formula". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: "wherein the first monomer unit containing a (meth)acrylonitrile monomer unit". This should read "wherein the first monomer unit contain. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 17, 20-23, 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchiyama et al. (JP3957412B2) hereinafter “Uchiyama”. Reference is made to attached machine translation.
Regarding claim 17, Uchiyama teaches a composition comprising a graft copolymer ([0023]), wherein: the graft copolymer has stem polymer ([0023]; “modified polyvinyl alcohol”) and a branch polymer ([0028] “cross linkable monomer (A)”, “unsaturated monomer (B)”) the stem polymer contains a polyvinyl alcohol structure ([0028)]), and the branch polymer contains a first monomer unit containing a (meth)acrylic acid monomer ([0029] “acidic monomers such as (meth) acrylic acid”). Uchiyama teaches the inclusion of a crosslinking agent (“polyethylene glycol di(meth)acrylate” [0046], pp. 8 Table 1).
Uchiyama does not explicitly disclose that the composition has a gel fraction of 30% or more; the gel fraction is represented by following formula: the gel fraction % = A x 100/1; A g is an insoluble content left on a filter pater when 1 g of the composition is added to 300 ml of dimethyl sulfoxide to obtain a mixture and the mixture is stirred at 60°C for 15 hours and then filtered through the filter paper, which is a No. SC filter paper as specified in JIS P 3801.
However, Uchiyama teaches a graft copolymer composition with a substantially similar composition to that of the claimed composition. Specifically, a crosslinkable monomer, such as polyethylene diacrylate, is present at 10-100 parts with respect to 100 parts of the modified polyvinyl alcohol ([0026]; [0014]; Formula II), a branch polymer, such as (meth)acrylic acid, is present at 0.1-25 parts based on 100 parts of the modified polyvinyl alcohol ([0030]). The range of compositions taught by Uchiyama overlaps with the ranges disclosed by the instant specification (Instant specification [0032]; for example Uchiyama in the case where PVA is 100 parts, crosslinkable monomer is 20 parts, and monomer (B) is 25 parts1). Uchiyama further teaches that the saponification degree of the polyvinyl alcohol structure of the composition is 86.5 to 89% ([0039]), which is nearly identical to the saponification degree of Examples 1 and 2 in the instant specification (Instant specification [0021]; Table 1); other parameters also fall within suitable ranges recited in the instant specification, such as a degree of polymerization being 500 ([0039]), within the preferred range of 500 to 2000 (Instant specification, [0021]). Uchiyama Example 4 further comprises similar components to that of Applicant’s disclosure, such as inclusion of a crosslinking agent (“polyethylene glycol di(meth)acrylate” [0046], pp. 8 Table 1) recited within the list of preferable crosslinking agents (Instant specification [0022-0024]) and a second monomer unit ([0046] “N, N-dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate”; see p. 8 of original document for Table 1) being a (meth)acrylic ester derivative recited as preferable (Instant specification [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select a composition within the ranges taught by Uchiyama. Further, gel fraction is understood in the art to represent the degree of crosslinking of the polymer. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that modifying the proportion of components and types of components, for example using a high content of crosslinking agent to increase the degree of crosslinking, would increase the gel fraction.
Given that the substantially similar properties and compositions of Uchiyama’s graft polymer composition, it is the Examiner’s position that said composition would inherently possess the same properties, including the same gel fraction range (See MPEP 2112.01). Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255,195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). “When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not.” In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir.1990).
Regarding claim 20, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 17. Uchiyama further teaches wherein the graft copolymer further includes a crosslinked portion derived from a crosslinking agent ([0026] “crosslinkable monomer (A)”; [0028]-[0031]; [0038]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 21, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 20. Uchiyama further teaches wherein the crosslinked portion includes an ether structure ([0024] “Crosslinkable monomer (A)… is polyethylene glycol di (meth) acrylate” which contains ether structures).
Regarding claim 22, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 20. Uchiyama further teaches the crosslinkable monomer (A) in an amount of 10 parts or more with respect to 100 parts of the modified polyvinyl alcohol ([0026]; [0028]-[0030]), which overlaps Applicant’s claimed range of 0.2 to 10 parts by mass. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the recited concentration because a prima facie case of obviousness exists in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Furthermore, "[ A ] prior art reference that discloses a range encompassing a somewhat narrower claimed range is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness." In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 23, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 17.
Uchiyama does not teach wherein: the composition has a swelling rate to an electrolytic solution of 90 to 230%; the swelling rate is a swelling rate after immersing the composition in the electrolytic solution at 25°C for 15 days; and the electrolytic solution is obtained by mixing ethylene carbonate and diethyl carbonate at a volume ratio of 1:2.
However, Uchiyama teaches a graft copolymer composition with a substantially similar composition to that of the claimed composition. Specifically, a crosslinkable monomer, such as polyethylene diacrylate, is present at 10-100 parts with respect to 100 parts of the modified polyvinyl alcohol ([0026]; [0014]; Formula II), a branch polymer, such as (meth)acrylic acid, is present at 0.1-25 parts based on 100 parts of the modified polyvinyl alcohol ([0030]). The range of compositions taught by Uchiyama overlaps with the ranges disclosed by the instant specification (Instant specification [0032]; for example Uchiyama in the case where PVA is 100 parts, crosslinkable monomer is 20parts, and monomer (B) is 25 parts2). Uchiyama further teaches that the saponification degree of the polyvinyl alcohol structure of the composition is 86.5 to 89% ([0039]), which is nearly identical to the saponification degree of Examples 1 and 2 in the instant specification (Instant specification [0021]; Table 1); other parameters also fall within suitable ranges recited in the instant specification, such as a degree of polymerization being 500 ([0039]), within the preferred range of 500 to 2000 (Instant specification, [0021]). Uchiyama Example 4 further comprises similar components to that of Applicant’s disclosure, such as inclusion of a crosslinking agent (“polyethylene glycol di(meth)acrylate” [0046], pp. 8 Table 1) recited within the list of preferable crosslinking agents (Instant specification [0022-0024]) and a second monomer unit ([0046] “N, N-dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate”; see p. 8 of original document for Table 1) being a (meth)acrylic ester derivative recited as preferable (Instant specification [0029]).
Given the substantially similar properties and compositions of Uchiyama’s graft polymer composition, one having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the graft polymer composition to exhibit a similar swelling rate behavior in the electrolytic solution, including within the claimed swelling weight range of 90 to 230%.
Regarding claim 25, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 17. Uchiyama further teaches wherein a saponification degree of the polyvinyl alcohol structure in the composition is 60 to 100 mol%. ([0039] “saponification degree: 86.5 to 89”; [0046]; [0016]).
Regarding claim 26, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 17. Uchiyama further teaches wherein an average polymerization degree of the polyvinyl alcohol structure in the composition is 300 to 4000 ([0039] “degree of polymerization: about 500”).
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchiyama (JP3957412B2), reference is made to attached machine translation, in view of Chung et al. (US 20140038048 A1) hereinafter “Chung” cited on the IDS filed 11/14/2024.
Regarding claim 18, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 17. Uchiyama teaches a composition comprising a graft copolymer ([0023]), wherein: the graft copolymer is comprised of a polyvinyl alcohol structure, an acidic monomer such as an acrylate, an acrylamide, or methacrylic acid, and polyethylene glycol di(meth)acrylate ([0024]; [0029]; Table 1 Example 4).
Uchiyama does not teach a (meth)acrylonitrile monomer unit.
However, Chung teaches a composition comprising a graft copolymer, wherein: the graft copolymer is comprised of a polyvinyl alcohol structure (0017]; [0023]; [0042]), an acryl monomer unit such as methyl(meth)acrylate or (meth)acrylonitrile ([0017]; [0042]; claim 5), a carboxylic monomer such as (meth)acrylic acid, and may further include a crosslinking agent such as diethylene glycol diacrylate ([0045]). Chung teaches that the binder composition disclosed increases adhesion between electrode and active material (abstract; [0017]; [0040]; [0155]-[0156])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the composition taught by Uchiyama by including a (meth)acrylonitrile monomer as taught by Chung.
One of ordinary skill in the art skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the composition taught by Uchiyama to increase adhesion when used as a binder in an electrode (abstract; [0017]; [0040]; [0155]-[0156]).
Claim(s) 19, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchiyama (JP3957412B2), reference is made to attached machine translation, in further view of Nakanishi et al. (WO 2018230599 A1) hereinafter “Nakanishi”, cited on the IDS filed 03/09/2023. Reference is made to US equivalent US20200207898A1 for translation.
Regarding claim 19, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 17.
Uchiyama does not explicitly teach wherein: the composition further comprises a free polymer; the free polymer does not have a covalent bond with the graft copolymer; and the free polymer includes at least a polymer containing a polyvinyl alcohol structure and/or a polymer containing the first monomer unit.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that during a grafting reaction, 100% grafting of all monomers onto the trunk polymer is not fully ensured, some of the monomers are not successfully grafted onto the trunk polymer, some of the monomers are copolymerized between the monomers, i.e. the free polymer is PVA or the polymer of the first monomer unit.
Therefore, the composition taught by Uchiyama meets the limitation of claim 19.
This conclusion is supported by Nakanishi. Nakanishi teaches a cathode binder composition comprising a graft copolymer including (meth) acrylonitrile and (meth) acrylic acid ester as a main component, graft-copolymerized to the backbone polymer having polyvinyl alcohol and a (meth) acrylonitrile-(meth) acrylic ester-based copolymer is generated as the branch polymer ([0029]). Nakanishi teaches that a copolymer by copolymerization of the monomer containing the (meth) acrylonitrile and the (meth) acrylic acid ester can be generated, and the generated copolymer is not involved in the graft copolymerization ([0047]).
Regarding claim 24, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 17.
Uchiyama is silent as to the graft ratio of the composition taught.
However, Nakanishi teaches a cathode binder composition comprising a graft copolymer including (meth) acrylonitrile and (meth) acrylic acid ester as a main component, graft-copolymerized to the backbone polymer having polyvinyl alcohol structure and a (meth) acrylonitrile-(meth) acrylic ester-based copolymer is generated as the branch polymer ([0029]). Nakanishi teaches that the graft ratio of the graft copolymer is preferably from 150 to 1,900%, more preferably from 155 to 1,800%, even more preferably from 200 to 1,500%, and even more preferably from 200 to 900%, from the viewpoint of improving the coverage with the active material ([0046]). Nakanishi teaches that a graft ratio less than 150% leads to decreased oxidation resistance and a graft ratio more than 900% leads to the binding property being lowered ([0046]).
Uchiyama and Nakanishi teach similar compositions of graft copolymer. Nakanishi teaches the composition as an electrode binder.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the graft ratio of the composition taught by Uchiyama to achieve a graft ratio of 200 to 900% as taught by Nakanishi.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the graft ratio of the composition taught by Uchiyama to achieve a graft ratio of 200 to 900% as taught by Nakanishi to improve coverage of active material without compromising oxidation resistance or binding properties.
Claim(s) 27-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchiyama (JP3957412B2), reference is made to attached machine translation, in view of Chung (US 20140038048 A1) in further view of further view of Nakanishi (WO 2018230599 A1). Reference is made to US equivalent US 20200207898 A1 for translation.
Regarding claim 27, Uchiyama teaches the composition of claim 17.
Uchiyama does not teach a composition for a positive electrode comprising the composition of claim 17.
However, Chung teaches a composition for an electrode binder (abstract) comprising a graft copolymer, wherein: the graft copolymer is comprised of a polyvinyl alcohol structure (0017]; [0023]; [0042]), an acryl monomer unit such as methyl(meth)acrylate or (meth)acrylonitrile ([0017]; [0042]; claim 5), a carboxylic monomer such as (meth)acrylic acid, and may further include a crosslinking agent such as diethylene glycol diacrylate ([0045]). Chung teaches that a binder may be used in an electrode ([0059]; [0060]). Chung teaches that the binder composition disclosed increases adhesion between electrode and active material (abstract; [0017]; [0040]; [0155]-[0156]).
Uchiyama and Chung teach similar compositions of graft copolymer. Chung teaches the composition as an electrode binder.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the composition taught by Uchiyama as an electrode binder as taught by Chung.
One of ordinary skill in the art skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the composition taught by Uchiyama as an electrode binder to increase adhesion in an electrode (abstract; [0017]; [0040]; [0155]-[0156]).
Uchiyama in view of Chung does not explicitly teach the use of the composition as a positive electrode binder.
However, Nakanishi teaches a cathode binder composition comprising a graft copolymer including (meth) acrylonitrile and (meth) acrylic acid ester as a main component, graft-copolymerized to the backbone polymer having polyvinyl alcohol structure and a (meth) acrylonitrile-(meth) acrylic ester-based copolymer is generated as the branch polymer ([0029]). Nakanishi teaches that the graft copolymer disclosed has high flexibility, good binding properties to positive electrode active material and metal foil, and covers the positive electrode active material ([0083]; [0086]; [0095]). Nakanishi teaches that a lithium-ion secondary battery produced with the disclosed binder has cycle characteristics and rate characteristics using high potential positive electrode active materials, is capable of suppressing OCV degradation during high temperature storage, and is excellent in electrode flexibility ([0083]).
Uchiyama, Chung, and Nakanishi teach similar compositions of graft copolymer comprising a polyvinyl alcohol backbone. Chung teaches a composition as an electrode binder, preferably a negative electrode binder. Nakanishi teaches a composition as a positive electrode binder.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the composition taught by Uchiyama as a positive electrode binder as taught by Nakanishi.
One of ordinary skill in the art skill in the art could have utilized the composition taught by Uchiyama as a positive electrode binder as taught by Nakanishi with a reasonable expectation of success because similar compositions are known in the art for use as electrode binders.
Regarding claim 28, modified Uchiyama teaches a composition for a positive electrode of claim 27. Nakanishi further teaches a slurry for the positive electrode comprising a graft copolymer with a polyvinyl alcohol backbone, a positive electrode active material, and a conductive auxiliary agent ([0086]-[0088]).
It would have been obvious to utilize a slurry containing a positive electrode active material, and a conductive auxiliary agent as taught by Nakanishi to form the positive electrode taught by modified Uchiyama because it is known in the art as a critical step in forming a positive electrode.
Regarding claim 29, modified Uchiyama teaches the slurry for the positive electrode of claim 28. Nakanishi further teaches wherein a solid content of the composition for the positive electrode is 0.01 to 20% by mass, more preferably 0.1 to 10% by mass, and even more preferably 1 to 3% by mass ([0090]).
Regarding claim 30, modified Uchiyama teaches the slurry for the positive electrode of claim 28. Nakanishi further teaches wherein the conductive auxiliary agent is at least one selected from a group consisting of fibrous carbon, carbon black, and carbon composite in which fibrous carbon and carbon black are interconnected (Example 13 [0144]-[0145]; Acetylene black is a form of carbon black).
Regarding claim 31, modified Uchiyama teaches the slurry for the positive electrode of claim 28. Nakanishi further teaches a positive electrode comprising a metal foil and a coating film of the slurry for the positive electrode on the metal foil ([0097];[ 0146]).
Regarding claim 32, modified Uchiyama teaches the slurry for the positive electrode of claim 31. Nakanishi further teaches wherein the secondary battery is at least one selected from a lithium-ion secondary battery, a sodium ion secondary battery, a magnesium ion secondary battery, and a potassium ion secondary battery ([0025]).
Regarding claim 33, modified Uchiyama teaches the slurry for the positive electrode of claim 32. Nakanishi further teaches wherein the positive electrode active material contains a composite metal oxide such as Li(CoXNiYMnZ)O2 (0<X<1, 0<Y<1, 0<Z<1, and X+Y+Z=1) and the secondary battery is a lithium-ion secondary battery ([0086]; [0025]).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 17-33 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 23 of copending Application No. 18017529 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims substantially overlap with the limitations of instant claim17.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tanaka et al. (Acrylonitrile-grafted poly(vinyl alcohol) copolymer as effective binder for high-voltage spinel positive electrode, 2017) teaches composition comprising a graft copolymer, wherein: the graft copolymer has a stem polymer and a branch polymer; the stem polymer contains a polyvinyl alcohol structure, the branch polymer contains a first monomer unit containing a (meth)acrylonitrile monomer unit (abstract; p. 122); wherein: the composition further comprises a free polymer; the free polymer does not have a covalent bond with the graft copolymer; and the free polymer includes at least a polymer containing a polyvinyl alcohol structure and/or a polymer containing the first monomer unit (p. 122). Tanaka further teaches a composition for a positive electrode (pp. 122-123).
Narutomi et al. (US 20190027756 A1) teaches a binder composition for negative electrode comprising a graft copolymer obtained by graft copolymerizing, with polyvinyl alcohol, a monomer containing (meth)acrylonitrile as a main component, wherein the polyvinyl alcohol has an average degree of polymerization of 300 to 3000; the polyvinyl alcohol has a saponification degree of 70 to 100 mol % (Abstract). Cited on the IDS filed 03/09/2023.
Narutomi et al. (JP 2019079646 A) teaches a binder composition comprises a graft copolymer which results from the grafting of a monomer including (meth)acrylonitrile as an essential component to polyvinyl alcohol where the average degree of polymerization of the polyvinyl alcohol is 300 to 3000; and the saponification degree is 70 to 100 mol% (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FELICITY B. ALBAN whose telephone number is (703)756-5398. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. 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.
/F.B.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
1 Total composition is 145 parts with approximately 69% PVA, 14% crosslinking agent, and 17% monomer (B).
2 Total composition is 145 parts with approximately 69% PVA, 14% crosslinking agent, and 17% monomer (B).