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 1-2, 8-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Moriguchi et al. US 2014/0199545 A1.
Moriguchi teaches a hot melt adhesive which comprises a propylene homopolymer and an ethylene-based copolymer (abstract).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Moriguchi teaches a hot melt adhesive composition (Example 5, Table 1, page 8) which comprises a propylene homopolymer (A1). Moriguchi highlights (para [0128]) that the propylene homopolymer is L-MODU X400S manufactured by Idemitsu Kosan Co., Ltd., which is the same propylene homopolymer as utilized by the instant specification (page 21, [Raw material] (A-1)). The propylene homopolymer L-MODU X400S inherently satisfies the conditions (1) to (3), with (1) melting point (Tm-D) of 80oC; (2) a molecular weight distribution (Mw/Mn) of 2.0; (3) a melt viscosity at 190°C of 8,500 mPa:s, and the semicrystallization time (t1/2) of 1200 seconds (instant specification Table 1, Reference Example 1), as required by the claimed limitations. Applicant’s attention is brought to: "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01 II.
Regarding claim 2, Moriguchi’s Example 5 (Table 1, page 8) utilizes 86 parts of propylene homopolymer A1 = (86/(86+14)) x 100 ≈ 86% by mass with respect to the homopolymer and ethylene based copolymer, which meets the claimed requirement.
Regarding claim 8, Moriguchi, teaches Example 8 (Table 1, page 8) which incorporates 25 parts of B5 which is an ethylene/octene copolymer (see para [0138]), which corresponds to the required ethylene-based copolymer (C), which is present at 25/(75+25) x 100 ≈ 25% by mass with respect to the homopolymer and ethylene based copolymer, and meets the claimed requirement.
Regarding claim 9, Moriguchi is silent on peel adhesion failure temperature, however teaches hot melt adhesives which are derived from polypropylene homopolymer and additional copolymers which are similar to instant examples. Applicant’s attention is brought to: Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01 I.
Claims 3-5 and 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Moriguchi et al. US 2014/0199545 A1, with evidentiary support reference Product description Licopene TM PP MA 6252 granules.
Regarding claims 3-5, Moriguchi teaches Example 8 (Table 1, page 8) which comprises E1, which is a maleic anhydride-modified wax, manufactured by Clariant K.K. under the trade name of “Licocene MA6252TP” (see para [0160]). As evidenced by the product description Licocene MA6252TP is a maleic anhydride grafted polypropylene wax, with a drop point (which is similar to melting point) of 137-142oC (Characteristics Table), and meets the claimed requirements.
Regarding claim 7, Moriguchi’s Example 8 (Table 1, pages 8 and 9) incorporates 3 parts by weight of maleic anhydride grafted polypropylene wax (E1), which is 3/(75+25+3) x 100 ≈ 2.9 mass % with respect to propylene homopolymer, ethylene copolymer and maleic anhydride grafted propylene, which meets the claimed requirement.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriguchi et al. US 2014/0199545 A1.
Regarding claim 10, as discussed when addressing claim 1, Moriguchi teaches the required propylene resin composition comprising a propylene homopolymer. Moriguchi in the detailed description of the invention (para [0027]) discloses that the propylene homopolymer has a melting point of 100 oC or lower, which overlaps with the claimed melting point requirement. In the case where the 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Moriguchi notes that the amount of the propylene homopolymer is preferably present in the amount of 60 to 95 parts by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the propylene homopolymer and the ethylene-based copolymer, which is slightly shy of the required 98% by mass requirement. However, applicant’s attention is brought to: a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties." See MPEP 2144.05 I.
Claims 3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriguchi et al. US 2014/0199545 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Kobayashi et al. US 2015/0284600 A1.
Moriguchi teaches a hot melt adhesive which comprises a propylene homopolymer and an ethylene-based copolymer (abstract), which can used for bookbinding and sanitary articles (para [0105] and [0107]).
Analogous reference Kobayashi also teaches propylene-based polymer and hot melt adhesive (title) which can be used for bookbinding and sanitary articles (Industrial applicability, para [0275]).
Regarding claim 3, Moriguchi does not address the melting point of propylene-based polymer as required by the claimed limitation. A practitioner skilled in the art, in order to further optimize the polypropylene based hot melt adhesive composition, would look to analogous art such as Kobayashi.
Similar to Moriguchi, Kobayashi teaches hot melt adhesive composition derived from a propylene-based polymer and an ethylene-based polymer (see Kobayashi claim 4). Kobayashi discloses (para [0170]) the melting point of the propylene-based polymer to be 0 to 140 oC, and preferably from 20 to 120 oC, which overlaps the claimed melting point. Advantageously, Kobayashi provides the motivation to utilize a propylene-based polymer having a melting point in the desired range, to improve the open time and heat creep resistance of the composition (para [0170]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified (added to) Moriguchi with a propylene-based polymer with a melting point of 120 oC as taught by Kobayashi for the same application of creating hot melt adhesive with improved open time and creep resistance.
Regarding claim 6, as discussed when addressing claim 3 above, Moriguchi in view of Kobayashi render the melting point requirement of the propylene-based polymer obvious. Kobayashi further recommends the weight average molecular weight of the propylene-based copolymer to be in the preferable range of 15,000 to 80,000 (para [0167]), in order to manage heat creep resistance, cohesive force and melt viscosity of the hot melt adhesive (para [0166]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified (added to) Moriguchi with a propylene-based polymer with a weight average molecular weight of 80,000 as taught by Kobayashi for the same application of creating a hot melt adhesive with improved cohesive force and melt viscosity.
Regarding claim 7, as discussed when addressing claim 3 above, Moriguchi in view of Kobayashi render the melting point requirement of the propylene-based polymer obvious. Kobayashi further discloses (para [0156]) the propylene-based polymer to be present in the amount of 1 to 30 parts by mass, which meets the claimed requirement. Advantageously, Kobayashi provides the motivation to utilize the recommended amounts of propylene-based polymer is to provide balance between favorable heat creep resistance and moderate open time (para [0156]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified (added to) Moriguchi with 30 parts of a propylene-based polymer as taught by Kobayashi for the same application of creating a hot melt adhesive with balanced heat creep resistance and moderate open time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Surbhi M Du whose telephone number is (571)272-9960. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am to 5:00pm.
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 (Riviere) 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.
/HEIDI R KELLEY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1765
/S.M.D./
Examiner
Art Unit 1765