DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-12, 19-20 in the reply filed on 9/9/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.03(a)).
Claims 13-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/9/2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein R1 and R2 comprise the same or different moieties chose from” should read “wherein R1 and R2 ae each independently chose from” . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-12, 19-20 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.
Claims 1-2 recite “C3-C12 cycloalkyl optionally substituted by one or more C1-C20 alkyl; C3-C12 cycloalkyl-C1-6-alkylene- wherein the C3-12 cyclokalkyl is optional substituted by one or more C1-C20 alkyl groups”, what does it mean?
Claim 3 recites “C3-C12 cycloalkyl-C1-6-alkylene-”, what does it mean?
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 8 recites the broad recitation, and the claim also recites a narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-12, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hjertberg et al (EP2935438) and in view of Ikeda et al (JPH06234890).
In setting forth this rejection a machine translation of JPH06234890 has been relied upon and all citations to paragraph numbers in the discussion below are with respect to the machine translation.
Hjertberg teaches a composition comprising 97.48 wt% of a bimodal polyethylene, 0.05 wt% of Pigment Blue 15:1, 0.16 wt% of Pigment Blue 29 and nucleating agents (page 27 example IE, page 17). The bimodal PE has a density of 948 kg/m3 and a MFR of 0.3g/10min (page 26).
Hjertberg does not explicitly teach the structure of the nucleating agents.
However, Ikeda teaches nucleating agents for polyethylene to improve strength, transparency and high speed processability [0003]. The nucleating agent can be terephthalic acid dicyclopentylamide
PNG
media_image1.png
316
674
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, or 2,6-naphthalenedicarboxylic acid dicyclohexylamide
PNG
media_image2.png
310
840
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(examples 10, 12). The amount of the nucleating agent is 0.01-2 parts by weight per 100 parts by weight of the polyethylene resin [0050, 0057]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize the nucleating agent of Ikeda in the composition of Hjertberg because it is recognized in the art those nucleating agents are suitable for a polyethylene composition.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WENWEN CAI whose telephone number is (571)270-3590. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9am-6pm.
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 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.
/WENWEN CAI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763