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 § 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 1-4, 9, and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chambard et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0338077.
The abstract characterizes the invention as a two-part, condensation-curable composition comprising a titanium-based catalyst. The participating materials are outlined in [0019-0024]. Whereas this portion of the disclosure seems to suggest that the silyl-terminated polymer (i) and the titanate catalyst (iv) exist independently of one another, it is inferred from
[0026] where suitable mol ratios of M-OR functions to Si-OH groups are defined, from
[0033] where the actual catalyst is labeled as being other than a “typical” titanate, and from
[0010] that (typical) titanate compounds are known to be hydrolyzed to Ti(OH)4 when formulated into two part, moisture-curable compositions thus deactivating them
that the curing agents prepared according to [0114] and [0116] are products derived from the reaction of said silyl/silanol-terminated polymer/polydimethylsiloxane having a viscosity of 2,000 mPa.s and Ti(OBu)4 compound. The so-called curing agents are correlated with a first part of a two part composition and the bis(alkoxysilyl)alkanes with which they are subsequently combined constitute a second part. Fumed silica, a source of water is added to the first part in these examples but paragraph [0025] indicates that it is actually preferred to initially store a hydrous filler separate of the catalyst so an immediately envisaged alternative is one where the silica is initially combined with the bis(alkoxysilyl)alkane.
Concerning claim 9, there is overlap in the list of optional ingredients outlined beginning at [0067].
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chambard et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0338077.
The Examples utilize as the crosslinker bis(trialkoxysilyl)alkanes but [0056] contemplates as alternatives siloxane polymers, dimethylpolysiloxanes having a viscosity within the range of 0.5-80,000 mPa.s in particular, bearing endgroups that are encompassed with the attribute “-SiR3nX3-n” in formula (7) of claim 6.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7-8, and 10 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.
There is no mention of the addition of a monosilylated diorganosiloxane nor was it obvious from the related prior art why one would be motivated to add one. As for claim 7 and the claims dependent therefrom, it is not clear why one of ordinary skill would added water to a system already requiring hydrous filler.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC S ZIMMER whose telephone number is (571)272-1096. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Heidi Kelley can be reached at 571-270-1831. 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.
May 14, 2026
/MARC S ZIMMER/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1765
Prosecution Insights