Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/043,787

BIMODAL POLYETHYLENE COPOLYMERS FOR PE-80 PIPE APPLICATIONS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 02, 2023
Examiner
HALL, DEVE V.
Art Unit
1763
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Univation Technologies, LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
676 granted / 902 resolved
+9.9% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
941
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.5%
+9.5% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 902 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Group I (claims 1-4 and 7-9) in the reply filed on 11/11/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). 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 non-obviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-3, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2019/046085 (hereinafter, BORSE ) in view of WO 2020/068413 (hereinafter, MURE). Regarding claims 1-3, BORSE teaches a bimodal polyethylene (PE), polyethylene compositions containing products and articles containing the same [0001]. The bimodal PE contains the (C3-C20)alpha-olefin-derived comonomeric units are 1-hexene-derived comonomeric units [0025]. In Aspect 1, the bimodal polyethylene composition comprising a lower molecular weight (LMW) polyethylene component and a higher molecular weight (HMW) polyethylene component, wherein each of the LMW and HMW polyethylene components comprises ethylene-derived monomeric units and (C3-C20)alpha-olefin-derived comonomeric units and wherein the bimodal polyethylene composition is characterized by each of limitations (a) to (f): (a) a resolved bimodality (resolved molecular weight distribution) showing in a chromatogram of gel permeation chromatography (GPC) of the bimodal polyethylene composition, a peak representing the LMW polyethylene component, and a local minimum in a range of Log(molecular weight) (“Log(MW))” 3.0 to 7.0 between the peak representing the HMW polyethylene component and the peak representing the LMW polyethylene component, measured according to the Bimodality Test Method; (b) a density from 0.9300 to 0.9500 gram per cubic centimeter (g/cm3) measured according to ASTM D792-13 Method B; (c) a melt index measured according to ASTM D1238-13 at 190oC under a load of 2.16 kilograms (“I2” or “MI2”) from 0.010 to less than 0.20 gram per 10 minutes (g/10 min); (d) a flow index measured according to ASTM D1238-13 at 190oC under a load of 21.6 kg (“I21” or “F21”) from 8 to 15 g/10 min.; (e) a flow rate ration (FRR) of the melt index to the flow index (“I21/I2”) from 100 to 800; and (f) from greater than 0 to 14 wt% of ethylenic-containing chains having a formula molecular weight (MW) of from greater than 0 to 10,000 grams per mole (g/mol), based on total weight of ethylenic-containing components in the bimodal PE composition [0020]. In Aspect 4. The bimodal PE composition of any one of aspects 1 to 3 further characterized by any one of limitations (g) to (l): (g) a molecular mass dispersity (Mw/Mn). DM (D-stroke M) from 5 to 30.1 all measured according to the Gel Permeation Chromatography (GPC) Test Method [0023]. The bimodal PE composition may be used to make pipes, films, sheets, extruded articles, and injection molded articles [0018 and 0030]. However, BORSE does not teach the bimodal poly(ethylene-co-1-hexene) copolymer composition comprising (h) a melt index measured according to ASTM D1238-13 at 190oC under a load of 5.00 kilograms (kg) (“I5” or “MI5”) from 0.25 to 0.50 gram per 10 minutes (g/10). In the same field of endeavor a pipe and manufactured article consisting of the bimodal ethylene-co-1-hexene copolymer composition (Abstract; [0001 and 0005-0007]), MURE teaches the composition comprises (a) melt flow index (5 kg) (I5 or MFI5) from 0.15 to 0.30 gram per 10 minutes (g/10 min) [0009]. The bimodal composition contains melt property performance defined by a combination of melt flow index (5 kg) and melt strength [0003]. Given BORSE teaches the bimodal PE composition for the manufacture of pipes [0018], it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have provided the melt flow index (5 kg) (I5 or MFI5) of MURE with the bimodal PE composition of BORSE for the benefit of obtaining melt property performance for pipes as taught by MURE. It is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose, see In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846,850,205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980). Regarding claims 7 and 8, BORSE teaches the bimodal PE composition may contain one, two, or more optional constituents. Examples of optional constituents are additives such as colorants, antioxidants, processing aid, lubricants, metal deactivators, and etc. [0033]. The bimodal PE composition may be used to make pipes, films, sheets, extruded articles, and injection molded articles [0018 and 0030]. Claims 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2019/046085 (hereinafter, BORSE ) in view of WO 2020/068413 (hereinafter, MURE) in further view of KWALK (U.S. Publication No. 2006/0036041, hereinafter KAWALK). Regarding claims 4 and 9, the combined disclosures of BORSE and MURE substantially teaches the present invention, see 7-10 paragraphs above. BORSE teaches the bimodal copolymer is made by polymerization by reactor catalyst [0021]. However, the combined disclosures do not teach the bimodal poly(ethylene-co-1-hexene) copolymer composition of claim 1 further characterized by any one of limitations (i) to (k). In the same field of endeavor of compositions comprising bimodal polyethylene composition, KWALK teaches a high strength bimodal polyethylene composition having a density of 0.940 g/cc or more, the composition comprises a high molecular weight polyethylene component having a high molecular weight polyethylene component and a low molecular weight polyethylene component. A pipe is formed from the composition that is subjected to internal pipe resistance has a extrapolated stress of 10 MPa or more when the internal pipe resistance curve is extrapolated to 50 or 100 years in accordance with ISO 9080:2003 (Abstract; [0006, 0031, and 0053]) which reads on (i) a minimum required strength (MRS) of at least 8 MPa. The term “high strength” means a collection of mechanical properties, e.g., strength-related properties, e.g., properties used to characterize resin used in making pipes, such as resin that would qualify as PE-80 resin or PE-100 resin, or PE-100+ resin [0018]. The composition includes a bimodal polyethylene prepared using the catalyst system [0015 and 0047-0054]. Given the disclosures of BORSE [0021] And MURE teach bimodal compositions for the manufacture of pipes by a catalyst system and KWALK teaches the same process, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have provided the high strength PE resin (PE-80 or PE-100, or PE-100+) of KWALK with the bimodal PE compositions of BORSE and MURE for the benefit of obtaining mechanical properties used in making pipes as taught by KWALK [0018]. It is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose, see In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846,850,205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVE V HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-7738. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9 am-5 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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at (571) 272-1130. 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. DEVE V. HALL Primary Examiner Art Unit 1763 /DEVE V HALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 02, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600670
PRECAST CONCRETE MOLDED BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595360
ROOFING COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING LINEAR LOW-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593848
TRANSPARENT ANTIVIRAL/ANTIMICROBIAL COATING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595319
RUBBER COMPOSITION AND PNEUMATIC TIRE USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595354
METHOD FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF A POLYCARBONATE COMPOSITION
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
75%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+17.0%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 902 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