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 .
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.
Priority
3. This application is a 371 of PCT/EP2021/076517 09/27/2021.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application EP 20199151.0 09/30/2020 filed on 02/16/23.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), filed on 02/16/23 has been considered. Please refer to Applicant's copy of the 1449 submitted herewith.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ongayi (US 2020/0199336) as evidenced from Holinda (US 2014/0072674).
Regarding claims 1-2, Ongayi discloses a copolymer of ethylene and C3 to C8 alpha-olefin such as 1-octene, wherein the alpha-olefin is present in the copolymer in an amount of 10 or 20 wt% (para [0047]-0049]), fall into claimed range of 10 to 20 wt%, wherein an example of copolymer is Affinity PL 1881G (table 1A). As evidenced from Holinda (table 8), Affinity PL 1881G is a copolymer of ethylene and 1-octene has density of 0.904 g/cm3 , fall into claim range of 890 to 915 kg/m3, MFR2 of 1 g/10 min, fall into claimed range of 0.5 to 8 g/10 min, melting temperature Tm of 100 0C, fall into claimed range between 100 and 120 0C, and Vicat of 86 0C, fall into claimed 80 to 96 0C, meeting the requirements of claim 1-2.
Regarding claim 3, Ongayi discloses an example of copolymer is Affinity PL 1881G (table 1A). As evidenced from Holinda (table 8), Affinity PL 1881G is a copolymer of ethylene and 1-octene has MFR2 of 1 g/10 min, fall into claimed range of 0.6 to 4 g/10 min.
Regarding claim 14, Ongayi discloses copolymer is obtained by blending a first ethylene copolymer and a second ethylene copolymer, wherein the first ethylene copolymer has a higher density than the second ethylene copolymer (para [0047]-[0059]).
Regarding claim 15, Ongayi discloses the blending 70% Dowlex NG 5056G + 30% Dow LDPE 320E (table 2), fall into instant claim blending ratio of 65:35 to 85:15 wt%.
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 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 1-7, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lernoux (US 2019/0300664) as evidenced from Holinda (US 2014/0072674).
Regarding claims 1-2, Lernoux discloses a copolymer of ethylene and C3 to C8 alpha-olefin such as 1-octene, wherein the alpha-olefin is present in the copolymer in an amount of 9 to 12 wt% (para [0043]), overlapping claimed range of 10 to 20 wt%, wherein an example of copolymer is Affinity PL 1881G (table 6). As evidenced from Holinda (table 8), Affinity PL 1881G is a copolymer of ethylene and 1-octene has density of 0.904 g/cm3, fall into claim range of 890 to 915 kg/m3, MFR2 of 1 g/10 min, fall into claimed range of 0.5 to 8 g/10 min, melting temperature Tm of 100 0C, fall into claimed range between 100 and 120 0C, and Vicat of 86 0C, fall into claimed 80 to 96 0C.
A prima facie case of obviousness exists for the copolymer, wherein Lernoux discloses a copolymer of ethylene and C3 to C8 alpha-olefin, wherein the alpha-olefin is present in the copolymer in an amount of 9 to 12 wt%, overlapping the requirement of claim 1. See In re Wertheim regarding prima facie cases with overlapping ranges (In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 3, Lernoux discloses an example of copolymer is Affinity PL 1881G (table 6). As evidenced from Holinda (table 8), Affinity PL 1881G is a copolymer of ethylene and 1-octene has MFR2 of 1 g/10 min, fall into claimed range of 0.6 to 4 g/10 min).
Regarding claim 4, Lernoux discloses the condition of measuring melt index (MI) (190 0C/2.16 kg) (para [0044]). It has been noted that applicants in specification at page 14, last 2 para, discloses the MFR₂ of polyethylene is determined at a temperature of 190 °C and a load of 2.16 kg. Both conditions are same, accordingly MI of Lernoux is considered as MFR. Lernoux discloses ethylene and C3 to C8 alpha-olefin has MFR2 of 0.1 to 3.0 g/10 min and MFR21/MFR2 of 25 to 80 (para [0044]-[0045]), results in M21 as 2.5 to 240 g/10 min, encompassing claimed range of 30 to 45.
A prima facie case of obviousness exists for the copolymer, wherein Lernoux discloses M21 as 2.5 to 240 g/10 min, encompassing the requirement of claim 4. It is well-settled that where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 267 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding claim 5, Lernoux discloses the condition of measuring melt index (MI) (190 0C/2.16 kg) (para [0044]). It has been noted that applicants in specification at page 14, last 2 para, discloses the MFR₂ of polyethylene is determined at a temperature of 190 °C and a load of 2.16 kg. Both conditions are same, accordingly MI of Lernoux is considered as MFR. Lernoux discloses ethylene and C3 to C8 alpha-olefin has MFR21/MFR2 of 35 to 50 (para [0045]), overlapping claimed range of 30 to 45.
A prima facie case of obviousness exists for the copolymer, wherein Lernoux discloses M21 as 35 to 50, overlapping the requirement of claim 5. It is well-settled that where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 267 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding claim 6, Lernoux discloses Mw/Mn of 2.5 to 5.5 (para [0048]), encompassing claimed range of 2.5 to 3.0.
A prima facie case of obviousness exists for the copolymer, wherein Lernoux discloses Mw/Mn of 2.5 to 5.5, encompassing the requirement of claim 6. It is well-settled that where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 267 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding claim 7, Lernoux discloses Mw of 25,000 to 150,000 (para [0028]), encompassing claimed range of 75,000 to 90,000 g/mol.
A prima facie case of obviousness exists for the copolymer, wherein Lernoux discloses Mw of 25,000 to 150,000, encompassing the requirement of claim 7. It is well-settled that where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 267 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding claim 14, Lernoux discloses copolymer is obtained by blending a first ethylene copolymer such as Elite 5400GS has density 0.916 and a second ethylene copolymer such as Affinity PL 1881G has density 0.904 (para [0040], table 6), wherein the first ethylene copolymer has a higher density than the second ethylene copolymer.
Regarding claim 15, Lernoux discloses the blending 70% PE3 + 30% LL1001XV (table 6), fall into instant claim blending ratio of 65:35 to 85:15 wt%.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Closest prior arts are Ongayi (US 2020/0199336) and Lernoux (US 2019/ 0300664).
Dependent claim 8 and 9 require crystallization temperature and glass transition temperature, respectively. Claim 10 require the vinyl content, claims 11, 13 require vinylidene content, and claim 12 require trisubstituted vinylene content.
Ongayi discloses a copolymer of ethylene and C3 to C8 alpha-olefin such as 1-octene, wherein the alpha-olefin is present in the copolymer in an amount of 10 or 20 wt% (para [0047]-0049]), wherein an example of copolymer is Affinity PL 1881G (table 1A). As evidenced from Holinda (table 8), Affinity PL 1881G is a copolymer of ethylene and 1-octene has density of 0.904 g/cm3 , MFR2 of 1 g/10 min, melting temperature Tm of 100 0C, and Vicat of 86 0C. Ongayi does not disclose the required features of dependent claims 8-13.
Lernoux discloses a copolymer of ethylene and C3 to C8 alpha-olefin such as 1-octene, wherein the alpha-olefin is present in the copolymer in an amount of 9 to 12 wt% (para [0043]), wherein an example of copolymer is Affinity PL 1881G (table 6). As evidenced from Holinda (table 8), Affinity PL 1881G is a copolymer of ethylene and 1-octene has density of 0.904 g/cm3, MFR2 of 1 g/10 min, melting temperature Tm of 100 0C, and Vicat of 86 0C. Lernoux does not disclose the required features of dependent claims 8-13. Closest prior arts do not suggest or disclose the features of dependent claims 8-13.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUMAR R BHUSHAN whose telephone number is (313)446-4807. The examiner can normally be reached 9.00 AM to 5.50 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 P 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.
/KUMAR R BHUSHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766