Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/027,670

COPOLYMERIZED SUPERABSORBENT POLYMERS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 22, 2023
Examiner
SALAMON, PETER A
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kimberly-Clark Worldwide Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
702 granted / 816 resolved
+21.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
832
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 816 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claim 1 and 3 - 11 in the reply filed on 1/12/26 is acknowledged. 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. Claim(s) 1, 3 – 5 and 7 – 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by US 5290890 to Ahmed et al hereinafter “Ahmed”. Ahmed is directed to graft polymers (1: 10 – 20). Regarding claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 11, Ahmed teaches a composition 372 in Table III which comprises 3 mol % AMPS, 20 mol % AM and the remainder 70 mol % of X-AA. AMPS = 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonate (sulfonic acid), AM = acrylamide and X-AA = sodium acrylate or potassium acrylate (sodium or potassium salt of acrylic acid). 3 mol % AMPS is within the claimed range. AMPS is the strong or super strong ionizable backbone monomer comprising an anion of a strong acid and X-AA is a neutralized backbone monomer. The super acid (H+) of the AMPS sulfonic acid group is a super ionizable counter ion. The polymerization is random. 3 mol % AMPS = 1.29 wt. %. This is within the claimed range. The swelled polymers (Table III) were force dried and mechanically blended into a powder. A powder is a collection of particles. As to claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 11 Ahmed teaches a composition 6 (last example) in Table II which comprises 3 mol % MPDMA, 10 mol % MES as a copolymer and the remainder 87 mol % of X-AA. MPDMA = 3-methylacrylamidopropyl dimethyl ammonium cation, MES = 2-methacryloyloxyethane sulfonate and X-AA = sodium acrylate or potassium acrylate (sodium or potassium salt of acrylic acid). A MPDMA / MES copolymer is made (5: 10 – 20). 13 mol % MPDMA / MES copolymer is within the claimed range. MPDMA / MES copolymer is the strong or super strong ionizable backbone monomer (copolymer) comprising an anion of a strong acid (sulfonic acid group from MES) and dimethyl ammonium cation from MPDMA. X-AA is a neutralized backbone monomer. The dimethyl ammonium cation from MPDMA is a super ionizable counter ion. These two groups are on the same copolymer. The polymerization is random. 13 mol % MPDMA / MES = 6.61 wt. %. This is within the claimed range. Regarding claim 10, the Examiner takes the position that the dimethylammonium counter ion has major dimension greater than about 0.25 nm because the atomic radii of nitrogen is 0.056 nm, the atomic radii of carbon is 0.067 nm and the atomic radii of hydrogen is 0.053. Accounting for 1 nitrogen, 2 carbon atoms and 6 hydrogens the major dimension is approximately 0.508 nm. This is within the claimed range. 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) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5290890 to Ahmed et al hereinafter “Ahmed”. For the limitation of the independent claim, refer to paragraphs 6 – 8 supra. Regarding claim 6, Ahmed is silent as to the particle diameter of the superabsorbent polymer. Ahmed teaches that the superabsorbent polymer is mechanically blended into a powder at least at (9: 3 – 4). With regard to applicant’s limitations regarding the particle size of the superabsorbent polymer, since the prior art is silent as to these limitations, it is the position of the Examiner that one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, would through routine and normal experimentation determine the optimized particle size to enhance liquid absorption. Ahmed teaches that the superabsorbent polymer is mechanically blended into a powder at least at (9: 3 – 4), the Examiner asserts that the particle size of the superabsorbent polymer is an art recognized result-effective variable. Thus it would be obvious in the optimization process to adjust the particle size of the superabsorbent polymer to achieve the properties (absorbance rate) desired. The Applicant does not show any unusual and/or unexpected results for the limitations stated. Note that the prior art provides the same effect desired by the Applicant, the formation of a powdered superabsorbent polymer. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER A. SALAMON whose telephone number is 571-270-3018. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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. PAS 2/4/26 /PETER A SALAMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 22, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600862
PROTEIN POLYURETHANE ALLOYS AND LAYERED MATERIALS INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600855
BIODEGRADATION ACCELERATOR FOR BIODEGRADABLE RESIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600823
Hydrogel Preparation, Method of Forming Same and Method of Coating a Fabric
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595401
ADHESIVE SET, ADHESIVE BODY, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595626
AQUEOUS BIODEGRADABLE-RESIN DISPERSION, PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR, AND FOOD-PACKAGING PAPER OBTAINED USING AQUEOUS BIODEGRADABLE-RESIN DISPERSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
86%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+5.9%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 816 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