DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Any new grounds of rejection set forth below are necessitated by Applicant’s amendment. For this reason, the present action is properly made final.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claims 1-9, 11-13 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-9, 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2019/0085157) in view of Fukumoto et al. (US 2025/0129206).
Regarding claim 1: Kim is directed to a latex composition for dip forming comprising:
A copolymer latex obtained by polymerizing a monomer mixture of a conjugated monomer, an ethylenically unsaturated acid monomer, and
A polyester polyol plasticizer of a polyalkylene adipates, polyalkylene sebacates, polyalkylene azelates, polyethylene glycol, polypropyleneglycol ([0037]). Specifically, the plasticizer, e.g. polyethylene glycol, is added after polymerization of the monomer mixture of a conjugated monomer, an ethylenically unsaturated acid monomer and is therefore equivalent to a copolymer comprising the monomer mixture and a polyester polyol.
Kim discloses polyester based plasticizers, although doesn’t mention an acid value of the polyester polyols.
Fukumoto is directed to plasticizers of vinyl based polymers, wherein the acid value of the polyester polyol is preferably 0-10 ([0056] Fukumoto). One skilled in the art would have been motivated to have selected the polyester polyol plasticizer of Fukumoto as the plasticizer of choice in Kim since it is excellent in performances such as cold resistance, non-migration, oil extraction resistance, and volatility resistance in a well-balanced manner, which particularly allows a molded article to be excellent in oil extraction resistance and transparency, and which can be produced from a biomass resource ([0020] Fukumoto). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to have selected a polyester polyol having an acid value of 2.0 or more to arrive at claim 10 of the present invention.
Regarding claim 2: Monomers include at least one of 1,3-butadiene, 2,3-dimethyl-1,3-butadiene, 2-ethyl-1,3-butadiene, 1,3-pentadiene and isoprene ([0049])
Regarding claim 3: The ethylenically unsaturated nitrile is selected from the group consisting of acrylonitrile, methacrylonitrile, fumaronitrile, α-chloronitrile
and α-cyanoethyl acrylonitrile. ([0051])
Regarding claim 4: The ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer such as acrylic acid, methacrylic acid, itaconic acid, maleic acid, or fumaric acid, maleic anhydride and citraconic anhydride ([0074]).
Regarding claim 5: The polyester polyol includes polyalkylene adipates (equivalent to a reaction product of a adipic acid based compound and a glycol based compound), and dioctyl terephthalate (equivalent to a phthalic acid based compound and a glycol based compound). ([0037]-[0040]).
Regarding claims 6-8: The copolymer is formed from 40 to 89 wt. % of the conjugated diene-based monomer; 10 to 50 wt.% of the ethylenically unsaturated nitrile monomer; and 0.1 to10 wt. % of the ethylenically unsaturated acid monomer,
based on the total of 100 wt. % of the monomers ([0072]-[0075]).
Regarding claim 9: The polyester polyol is used in an amount of 1-10 parts by weight relative to 100 parts of the copolymer latex ([0041]).
Regarding claim 11: A method for preparing a dip formed article comprising:
(a) Preparing a copolymer latex obtained by polymerizing a monomer mixture of a conjugated diene based monomer, an ethylenically unsaturated nitrile monomer and an ethylenically unsaturated acid monomer;
(b) adding to the copolymer latex a polyester polyol as a plasticizer
(c) performing dip molding.
Regarding claim 12: A dip formed article of a glove is disclosed.
Regarding claim 13: The gloves are used for industrial use (abstract Kim).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/2025 (herein “Remarks”) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (p. 7-8 Remarks) Claim 1 has been amended to require the acid value of the polyester polyol to be 2.0 to 5.0. This is crucial because it allows excellent durability and biodegradability as demonstrated in the working examples (Table 2 for durability and Table 3 for tensile strength/elongation). While Fekumoto mentions a broad range of 0-10, the working examples show a much lower range of 0.23-0.47, significantly below the 2.0 lower limit of the present invention.
This argument is not found persuasive since it is not necessary for Fukumoto to disclose working examples with the same acid value of the present invention. Rather, Fukumoto discloses a preferred range of 0 – 3.0 at [0056], which includes the value of the present invention. A prima facie case of obviousness typically exists when the ranges of a claimed composition overlap the ranges disclosed in the prior art. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT T BUTCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3514. The examiner can normally be reached Telework M-F 9-5 Pacific Time Zone.
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, Lanee Reuther can be reached at (571) 270-7026. 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.
/ROBERT T BUTCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764