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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, hydroxy functionalized acrylate resin, Cymel NF 3030, Cycat 4045 in the reply filed on 3/5/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the hydroxyl active equivalent weight of claim 14 cannot be exactly compared to the hydroxyl equivalent weight of Tao because claim 14 includes an aqueous phase, and, examination of all species together would not be burdensome. This is not found persuasive because the aqueous phase dilution does not change the hydroxyl equivalent weight value of a resin, because, the hydroxyl equivalent weight is based solely on the MW and hydroxyl functionality of the resin. That it is in an aqueous phase in claim 14 is moot, the value would be the same regardless. Further, there are numerous species in the claims, each laid out in the restriction requirement. The special technical feature is known, thus, restriction between such is found proper.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Priority
The foreign priority is not in English, the effective date of the claims is that of the PCT: 8/17/21
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/5/24, 6/2/23, 2/17/23 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1, and its dependents, is objected to because of the following informalities: “the urea crosslinking agent” should be amended to “the urea resin crosslinking agent”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 16-21 (albeit withdrawn) are objected to because of the following informalities: they should all read “further comprises” instead of “comprises”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 22 and its dependents, is objected to because of the following informalities: “component A having the aqueous of the” should read “component A having the aqueous phase of the”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 14, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pisanova (US 2007/0167561) in view of Tao (US 2013/0338263).
Pisanova discloses a curable aqueous composition containing a hydroxy-containing polymer, a multifunctional crosslinking agent and a catalyst (abstract). The aqueous composition comprises 10-95 wt% hydroxy containing polymer, and, 5-90 wt% crosslinking agent [0016].
The instant claims convert to 10.5-55.25 wt% reactive resin functionalized with hydroxyl groups (the 10.5 wt% is calculated as follows: 35-85 wt% of an aqueous phase having 30-65 wt% resin, 35*0.3 = 10.5) and 3.6-16.25 wt% urea resin crosslinking agent (calculated the same as above).
The 10-95 wt% hydroxy containing polymer thusly meets the amount of reactive resin functionalized with hydroxyl groups, and, the 5-90 wt% crosslinking agent embraces the wt% of urea resin crosslinking agent of claim 14.
The crosslinker may be a multifunctional aldehyde such as glyoxal or malanaldehyde blocked with urea [0026, 0027], which meets the urea resin crosslinking agent that is a reaction product formed by urea and a multifunctional aldehyde of claim 14. The catalyst may be p-toluenesulfonic acid in amounts from 0.5-5 wt% [0036], meeting the claimed catalyst with pKa value of 2 or less (p-toluenesulfonic acid is the elected species thus must meet the claimed pKa).
Pisanova includes elements as set forth above. The hydroxy functional polymer may be polyvinyl alcohol (PVOH) [0023] having Mn up to 85000 [0024]. The hydroxy functional polymer implicitly has a hydroxy equivalent weight thereof (this is the ratio of MW to hydroxy groups) but Pisanova does not explicitly disclose the hydroxyl active equivalent weight thereof.
Tao discloses reaction products of hydroxy containing polyhydric alcohols, and, epoxy or other reactive agents (abstract). Tao discloses the polyhydric alcohol to be PVOH having a Mn 5k-50k, embracing the same Mn as Pisanova. Tao discloses the hydroxy equivalent weigh of said PVOH is from 30-1000 g/eq [0099]. Tao thusly discloses this to be a known hydroxy equivalent weight for PVOH having an Mn from 5-50k that is used as a reactive agent in a polymer composition.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the invention to include in Pisanova the use of a hydroxy equivalent weight of 30-1000 g/equivalent, as taught by Tao, since this is recognized for PVOH having a Mn of 5-50k as a suitably known equivalent weight for reactive PVOH resin compositions.
Elements above meet the composition requirements of claims 14 and 22. In claim 14 the “for producing….by continuously…or by pressing” is the future intended use of the aqueous adhesive formulation. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Additionally, the composition is used as a binder for fiberboard compositions (abstract).
In claim 22, the claim is drawn to an adhesive formulation comprising all the elements of claim 14. The ‘first aqueous component A’ and ‘second component B’ are already mixed together to form the final product. These limitations are product by process limitations. As long as the end wt% of claim 14 are met, the formulation wt% of claim 22 are moot, e.g. one can start with any formulation and/or just add each component to water, and meet the claim limitations. The mixing/formulation aspects therein not being pertinent unless Applicant shows a distinct product is produced.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pisanova and Tao in further view of Quinn (US 2013/0023174) and Hernandez (US 2013/0334726).
Pisanova and Tao include elements as set forth above. Pisanova discloses the use of hydroxy functional PVOH as the resin but does not disclose the use of hydroxy functional acrylate resins.
Quinn discloses binder compositions comprising a polyol binder and crosslinking agent (abstract) used for fiber boards, thus akin to Pisanova. Quinn discloses the polyol binder may be polyvinyl alcohol (PVOH), this akin to Pisanova. Quinn also discloses the polyol binder may be a hydroxy functional acrylic resin [0033]. Quinn thusly teaches PVOH and hydroxy functional acrylic resins to function equivalently for binder polymers for fiberboards.
Hernandez discloses fiber insulation products (akin to Pisanova) comprising a surfactant and binder dispersion (abstract). The binder is a polyhydroxyl compound [0054], akin to Pisanova. The binder may be PVOH and also may be hydroxy functional acrylic resins [0056]. Hernandez thusly also teaches the functional equivalence of PVOH and hydroxy functional acrylic resins for binders for fiber boards.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Pisanova and Tao the use of hydroxy functional acrylic resins, as taught by Quinn and Hernandez, since it is recognized in the art of hydroxyl-containing binder resins for fiberboards to function equivalently as PVOH.
Because the resin is aqueous based, with an acidic catalyst, the acrylic resin would implicitly form the acrylate salt, meeting the elected hydroxy functional acrylate resin of claim 15. Further, one would immediately envisage the same hydroxyl equivalent weight taught by Pisanova and Tao for the acrylate resin, as used for the PVOH, since the resin must have a hydroxy equivalent weight, and, one would have a reasonable expectation to use such.
Elements above meet claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALICIA BLAND whose telephone number is (571)272-2451. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 am -3:00 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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/ALICIA BLAND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759