Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/026,848

THERMOPLASTIC RESIN COMPOSITION AND MOLDED ITEM FORMED FROM SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 17, 2023
Examiner
FISCHER, JUSTIN R
Art Unit
1749
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Toray Industries, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
44%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
47%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 44% of resolved cases
44%
Career Allow Rate
724 granted / 1626 resolved
-20.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
106 currently pending
Career history
1732
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
69.8%
+29.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.8%
-24.2% vs TC avg
§112
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1626 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. Claim(s) 8, 9, 11, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US 2019/0203041) and further in view of Hatanaka (US 2014/0235767). Park is directed to a composition for a molded article comprising 100 parts of polycarbonate resin (claimed thermoplastic resin A), 0.5-3 parts by weight of a modified polyolefin (claimed modified resin B), and 0.1-5 parts by weight of a fluorinated olefin resin or PTFE (claimed polytetrafluorethylene D) (Abstract and Paragraphs 3, 6, and 60). Park further states that said composition demonstrates high impact resistance and flame retardancy (Paragraph 6). In such an instance, though, Park is silent with respect to the inclusion of a modified polyorganopolysiloxane (claimed component C). It is initially noted that the composition of Park is described as including one or more types of any typical additive, such as lubricants, used in thermoplastic resin compositions (Paragraph 64). In terms of the type of lubricants, modified silicone oils (e.g. alicyclic epoxy-modified silicone oil) represent one of the most well-known and conventional types of lubricants used in thermoplastic resin compositions, as shown for example by Hatanaka (Paragraphs 86 and 89). Hatanaka further states that said lubricant is included at loadings between 0.01 % and 5% (Paragraph 90). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use a modified silicone oil as the disclosed lubricant in the composition of Park as it represents a conventional type of lubricant and Applicant has not provided a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the claimed type of polyorganopolysiloxane (for example, none of the experimental compositions include polycarbonate as the thermoplastic resin and thus, it is unclear if any realized benefits are specific to the thermoplastic resin in Tables 1 and 2 or would in fact be realized with any thermoplastic resin). Furthermore, it is unclear if any realized benefits are specific to the modified silicone oil in the experimental compositions or if said benefits would be realized with any type of modified polyorganosiloxane. With respect to claim 9, given a modified polyolefin resin loading of 0.1 %, for example, any of the disclosed loadings for the modified polyorganopolysiloxane loadings would result in a quantitative relationship that satisfies the claimed invention. Regarding claim 11, Park broadly states that said modified polyolefin is formed by polymerizing “an olefin” with a C1-C12 alkyl (meth)acrylate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the general language “an olefin” as including well known and conventional olefins, including polypropylene. As to claim 13, Hatanaka discloses alicyclic epoxy-modified silicone oils. Claim(s) 8-10 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gareiss (US 6,469,095) and further in view of Hatanaka. Gareiss is directed to a thermoplastic molding composition comprising 10-90 % by weight of a thermoplastic resin (e.g. vinyl aromatic polymers) (claimed component A), 1 to 20% by weight of a polyethylene which contains carboxy groups (claimed component B), and 0 to 2% by wight of polytetrafluoroethylene or PTFE (claimed component D). Gareiss further teaches the inclusion of common additives, including lubricants (Column 15, Lines 15-20). In such an instance, though, Gareiss silent with respect to the specific selection of a modified polyorganosiloxane as the disclosed lubricant. In terms of the type of lubricants, modified silicone oils (e.g. alicyclic epoxy-modified silicone oil) represent one of the most well-known and conventional types of lubricants used in thermoplastic resin compositions, as shown for example by Hatanaka (Paragraphs 86 and 89). Hatanaka further states that said lubricant is included at loadings between 0.01 % and 5% (Paragraph 90). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use a modified silicone oil as the disclosed lubricant in the composition of Gareiss as it represents a conventional type of lubricant and Applicant has not provided a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the claimed type of polyorganopolysiloxane (for example, none of the experimental compositions include polycarbonate as the thermoplastic resin and thus, it is unclear if any realized benefits are specific to the thermoplastic resin in Tables 1 and 2 or would in fact be realized with any thermoplastic resin). Furthermore, it is unclear if any realized benefits are specific to the modified silicone oil in the experimental compositions or if said benefits would be realized with any type of modified polyorganosiloxane. With respect to claim 9, given a modified polyolefin resin loading of 1 %, for example, any of the disclosed loadings for the modified polyorganopolysiloxane loadings would result in a quantitative relationship that satisfies the claimed invention. Regarding claim 10, as noted above, the thermoplastic resin can be a vinyl aromatic polymer (Column 3, Lines 10+). Gareiss teaches the preferred use of polystyrene and impact-modified polystyrene. As to claim 12, Gareiss teaches number average molecular weights as large as 100,000 (Column 1, Lines 1-10). This suggests weight average molecular weights that are greater than 100,000 given that polydispersity index values for polymers are greater than 1 (polydispersity index corresponds with ratio between weight average molecular weight and number average molecular weight). With respect to claim 13, Hatanaka discloses alicyclic epoxy-modified silicone oils. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00. 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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at 571-270-5545. 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. Justin Fischer /JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 August 20, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 17, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600178
TUBELESS TIRE INSERT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600842
TYRE AND ELASTOMERIC COMPOUND FOR TYRE, COMPRISING CROSS-LINKED PHENOLIC RESINS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594792
Tire With Pressure Zero Sidewall Hoop Rings and Method of Manufacture
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583259
PNEUMATIC TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576675
TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
44%
Grant Probability
47%
With Interview (+2.6%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1626 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month