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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicants’ submission filed on May 27, 2026, has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 23, the claim recites the article according to claim 1, comprising six layers in total. Applicants’ specification as originally filed does not appear to teach the claimed structure.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 23, the claim recites the article according to claim 1, comprising six layers in total. Claim 1 recites an article comprising a chemical-resistant layer, a barrier layer, and a thermoplastic layer. The claim does not recite additional layers and only three layers are recited. Since claim 23 recites six layers in total, it is unclear what the remaining layers necessarily entail, including what structure necessarily comprises a “layer” within the scope of the claim. For example, it is unclear if the “six layers” may only comprise combinations of the recited layers, or if the remaining layers may comprise other structures outside the scope of the layers claimed in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5-8, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2012/0237747 to Tai in view of US Pub. No. 2004/0058603 to Hayes.
Regarding claims 1, 2, 5-8, and 23, Tai teaches a multilayered structure that includes no less than 8 resin-layers, the resin-layer including a layer A constituted with a resin composition containing a gas barrier resin, and a layer B constituted with a resin composition containing a thermoplastic resin (Tai, Abstract). Tai teaches that the gas barrier resin may be an ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer to further improve the gas barrier properties, wherein the content of ethylene units is preferably no less than 3 mol % and no greater than 70 mol % (Id., paragraphs 0020-0021). Tai teaches that the thermoplastic resin is at least one resin selected from the group consisting of thermoplastic polyurethane, polyamide, and an adhesive resin having a functional group capable of reacting with a group included in the gas barrier resin (Id., paragraphs 0029-0030). Tai teaches that it is desired that the thermoplastic resin includes the adhesive resin having a functional group, wherein the adhesive resin may be a carboxylic acid-modified polyolefin (Id., paragraph 0030). Tai teaches that layer A may be constituted with either a single resin composition or a plurality of types of resin composition, such as a carboxylic acid, and that layer B may be constituted with either a single resin composition or a plurality of types of resin composition (Id., paragraphs 0047, 0123, 0126-0127, 0153-0154, 0179-0183). Tai teaches that the order of lamination of the layer A and the layer B is not particularly limited, such as an alternately laminated structure (AB)n or (AABB)n (Id., paragraphs 0048-0054). Tai teaches that the multilayered structure is excellent in interlayer adhesiveness, has superior gas barrier properties, stretchability, thermoformability and the like (Id., paragraph 0007) which may be suitably used for architectural materials, agricultural sheet materials, and geomembrane applications (Id., paragraphs 0294, 0303-0305).
Tai teaches that the multilayered structure may include other layers in addition to the layer A and the layer B (Tai, paragraph 0307). Tai teaches that the multilayered structure may have a supporting layer laminated on either one or both faces of the laminate (Id., paragraph 0308). Tai does not appear to specifically teach the claimed chemical-resistant layer comprising a polyurea and including a polyurea-impregnated geotextile.
Hayes teaches a similar multilayer laminated material including a fabric layer sandwiched between two layers of polymer material comprising a vinyl(co)polymer and a polyurethane material (Hayes, Abstract), having sufficient strength, tear resistance, and weathering resistance (Id., paragraph 0001). Hayes teaches that the material can consist of, counting from one side to the other side of the laminate, optionally a fourth polymeric layer comprising a thermoplastic urethane, a third polymeric layer comprising a pre-formed polyurethane film, a second polymeric layer comprising a polyurethane, a textile, a first polymeric layer comprising a vinyl, an optional fourth polymeric layer comprising a urethane, a further fifth polymeric layer similar to the second polymeric layer disposed on the outside of the third polymeric layer, and a sixth polymeric layer which may or may not be of a similar composition and properties of the third layer, wherein the sixth polymeric is disposed exterior to the fifth polymeric layer and interior to the optional fourth polymeric layer (Id., paragraphs 0045-0070). Hayes teaches that the textile layer may be a scrim, woven, knitted, and non-woven fabrics comprising any suitable fabric material including polyurethane being particularly applicable (Id., paragraphs 0080-0089). Hayes teaches that the textile layer advantageously provides biaxial strength, tear resistance, and overall mechanical stability to the finished product (Id., paragraph 0080). Hayes teaches that the fabric may be pre-treated with aqueous dispersions of organic binders, especially with a polyurethane-based adhesive (Id., paragraph 0091). Hayes teaches that the first polymeric layer may comprise one or more vinyl sub-layers laminated one over another (Id., paragraph 0117). Hayes teaches that the second polymeric layer is preferably a polyurea-based primer layer, wherein the term “polyurethanes” also includes “polyureas” (Id., paragraph 0121). Hayes teaches that the third polymeric layer is preferably a polyurethane-based or polyurea-based formulation that has superior anti-wear and anti-rip properties (Id., paragraphs 0050, 0147-0151). Hayes teaches that the pre-formed layer has a thickness from about 0.001 inches to 0.06 inches (Id., paragraph 0154). Note that based on the definition provided by Hayes, a “polyurethane” is alternatively a “polyurea”. Hayes teaches that a fourth layer of polymeric material is applied to provide increased wear resistance and chemical stability, which includes about 90% to 100% of a polyurea polymer (Id., paragraphs 0165-0174).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the multilayered geomembrane structure of Tai, wherein the supporting layers are 100% polyurea outer layers having a thickness, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Hayes, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional multilayered geomembrane structure having an outer layer known in the art to provide superior anti-wear and anti-rip properties suitable for similar applications.
Note that the layer A and layer B may each be constituted with either a single resin composition or a plurality of types of resin composition, such as a carboxylic acid, wherein layer A comprises ethylene-vinyl alcohol and layer B comprises polyurethane alternately laminated or in other suitable order, such as A, A, B, B. The layers A and B are within the scope of each of the barrier layer and thermoplastic resin layer, and tie layer.
Regarding claim 23, as set forth above, it is unclear exactly what is claimed. However, the prior art combination teaches that the order of lamination of the layer A and the layer B is not particularly limited, such as an alternately laminated structure (AB)n or (AABB)n. The first six layers of the prior art combination are within the scope of the claimed structure. Alternatively, in a structure arranged (AABB)n wherein the layers are bonded, the “AA” structure is considered to be a single layer and the other “BB” structure is similarly considered as a single layer. Therefore, the structure disclosed by the prior art appears to teach the claimed layers. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the multilayered geotextile of the prior art combination, and varying the layers, such as claimed, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional multilayered geotextile structure having the desired properties including thickness suitable for the intended application.
Claims 1, 2, 5-8, and 10-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2005/0058838 to Markusch in view of US Pub. No. 2012/0237747 to Tai.
Regarding claims 1, 2, 5-8, and 10-22, Markusch teaches geotextile/polyurea/composite liners prepared by soaking geotextiles with polyurethane compositions (Markusch, Abstract). Markusch teaches impregnating one or more geotextiles with a polyurethane to form a geotextile reinforced polyurethane composite (Id., paragraph 0016). Markusch teaches that one or more geotextiles may be used in combination with the number of layers and thickness being determined by the choice of geotextiles (Id., paragraph 0028) for higher strength and dimensional stability (Id., paragraph 0041). Markusch teaches that polyurethane soaked geotextiles may be installed in such a way that they overlap to a certain extent, such that after curing, a seamless permanent flexible composite liner is obtained (Id., paragraph 0034). Markusch teaches Examples where a polyurethane composition was poured on geotextiles until the liquid composition has soaked through, followed by curing (Id., Examples 1-2). Markusch teaches that the geotextiles are used as liners, roof membranes, secondary containment, etc. (Id., paragraph 0012).
Markusch does not appear to teach the claimed thermoplastic resin and barrier layers. However, Tai teaches a multilayered structure that includes no less than 8 resin-layers, the resin-layer including a layer A constituted with a resin composition containing a gas barrier resin, and a layer B constituted with a resin composition containing a thermoplastic resin (Tai, Abstract). Tai teaches that the gas barrier resin may be an ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer to further improve the gas barrier properties, wherein the content of ethylene units is preferably no less than 3 mol % and no greater than 70 mol % (Id., paragraphs 0020-0021). Tai teaches that the thermoplastic resin is at least one resin selected from the group consisting of thermoplastic polyurethane, polyamide, and an adhesive resin having a functional group capable of reacting with a group included in the gas barrier resin (Id., paragraphs 0029-0030). Tai teaches that it is desired that the thermoplastic resin includes the adhesive resin having a functional group, wherein the adhesive resin may be a carboxylic acid-modified polyolefin (Id., paragraph 0030). Tai teaches that layer A may be constituted with either a single resin composition or a plurality of types of resin composition, such as a carboxylic acid, and that layer B may be constituted with either a single resin composition or a plurality of types of resin composition (Id., paragraphs 0047, 0123, 0126-0127, 0153-0154, 0179-0183). Tai teaches that the order of lamination of the layer A and the layer B is not particularly limited, such as an alternately laminated structure (AB)n or (AABB)n (Id., paragraphs 0048-0054). Tai teaches that the multilayered structure is excellent in interlayer adhesiveness, has superior gas barrier properties, stretchability, thermoformability and the like (Id., paragraph 0007) which may be suitably used for architectural materials, agricultural sheet materials, and geomembrane applications (Id., paragraphs 0294, 0303-0305).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the multilayered geotextile of Markusch, and including the multilayered structure of Tai arranged as claimed, as taught and suggested by Tai, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional multilayered geotextile structure having additional layers to predictably provide interlayer adhesiveness, superior gas barrier properties, stretchability, thermoformability and the like for similar geomembrane applications.
Regarding claims 5-8, the prior art combination teaches that the order of lamination of the layer A and the layer B is not particularly limited, such as an alternately laminated structure (AB)n or (AABB)n. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the multilayered geotextile of the prior art combination, and arranging the layers as claimed, as taught by Tai, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional multilayered geotextile structure having the desired arrangement of layers and the desired properties, suitable for the intended applications.
Regarding claims 10-13, the prior art combination teaches Examples where a polyurethane composition was poured on geotextiles until the liquid composition has soaked through. Such a structure would predictably result in a polyurea layer existing above and below the soaked geotextile. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the multilayered geomembrane structure of the prior art combination, wherein polyurea is present on both surfaces of the soaked geotextile, as taught by Markusch, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional multilayered geomembrane structure having a predictably resulting structure based on the desired properties and adhesiveness.
Regarding claims 14-18 and 20-22, the prior art combination teaches that polyurethane soaked geotextiles may be installed in such a way that they overlap to a certain extent, such that after curing, a seamless permanent flexible composite liner is obtained. The overlap caused by the soaked and cured textiles comprises the polyurea, which is within the scope of the claimed seam. The prior art combination teaches alternating layers A and B, which may comprise ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer as claimed and polyurethane respectively.
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the multilayered geomembrane structure of the prior art combination, and arranging the structure such that outer layers comprise the soaked geotextile and alternatively layers A and B, such as the claimed structure, as taught by the prior art, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional multilayered geomembrane structure having a predictably resulting structure based on the desired properties and adhesiveness.
Claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-12, and 14-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2005/0058838 to Markusch in view of US Pub. No. 2012/0237747 to Tai and US Pub. No. 2004/0058603 to Hayes.
Regarding claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-12, and 14-23, the prior art combination appears to teach the claimed invention. Alternatively, in the event it is shown that the chemical resistant layer is not established by the prior art, Hayes teaches a similar multilayer laminated material including a fabric layer sandwiched between two layers of polymer material comprising a vinyl(co)polymer and a polyurethane material (Hayes, Abstract), having sufficient strength, tear resistance, and weathering resistance (Id., paragraph 0001). Hayes teaches that the material can consist of, counting from one side to the other side of the laminate, optionally a fourth polymeric layer comprising a thermoplastic urethane, a third polymeric layer comprising a pre-formed polyurethane film, a second polymeric layer comprising a polyurethane, a textile, a first polymeric layer comprising a vinyl, an optional fourth polymeric layer comprising a urethane, a further fifth polymeric layer similar to the second polymeric layer disposed on the outside of the third polymeric layer, and a sixth polymeric layer which may or may not be of a similar composition and properties of the third layer, wherein the sixth polymeric is disposed exterior to the fifth polymeric layer and interior to the optional fourth polymeric layer (Id., paragraphs 0045-0070). Hayes teaches that the textile layer may be a scrim, woven, knitted, and non-woven fabrics comprising any suitable fabric material including polyurethane being particularly applicable (Id., paragraphs 0080-0089). Hayes teaches that the textile layer advantageously provides biaxial strength, tear resistance, and overall mechanical stability to the finished product (Id., paragraph 0080). Hayes teaches that the fabric may be pre-treated with aqueous dispersions of organic binders, especially with a polyurethane-based adhesive (Id., paragraph 0091). Hayes teaches that the first polymeric layer may comprise one or more vinyl sub-layers laminated one over another (Id., paragraph 0117). Hayes teaches that the second polymeric layer is preferably a polyurea-based primer layer, wherein the term “polyurethanes” also includes “polyureas” (Id., paragraph 0121). Hayes teaches that the third polymeric layer is preferably a polyurethane-based or polyurea-based formulation that has superior anti-wear and anti-rip properties (Id., paragraphs 0050, 0147-0151). Hayes teaches that the pre-formed layer has a thickness from about 0.001 inches to 0.06 inches (Id., paragraph 0154). Note that based on the definition provided by Hayes, a “polyurethane” is alternatively a “polyurea”. Hayes teaches that a fourth layer of polymeric material is applied to provide increased wear resistance and chemical stability, which includes about 90% to 100% of a polyurea polymer (Id., paragraphs 0165-0174).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the multilayered geotextile structure of the prior art combination, wherein the outer polyurea/geotextile composite is bonded to an outer preformed polyurea layer having a thickness, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Hayes, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional multilayered geotextile structure having an outer layer known in the art to provide superior anti-wear and anti-rip properties suitable for similar applications.
Regarding claim 23, as set forth above, it is unclear exactly what is claimed. However, the prior art combination teaches that the order of lamination of the layer A and the layer B is not particularly limited, such as an alternately laminated structure (AB)n or (AABB)n. The first six layers of the prior art combination are within the scope of the claimed structure. Alternatively, in a structure arranged (AABB)n wherein the layers are bonded, the “AA” structure is considered to be a single layer and the other “BB” structure is similarly considered as a single layer. Therefore, the structure disclosed by the prior art appears to teach the claimed layers. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the multilayered geotextile of the prior art combination, and varying the layers, such as claimed, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional multilayered geotextile structure having the desired properties including thickness suitable for the intended application.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed May 27, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants argue that there is no disclosure of ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer as claimed being contained in Tai’s thermoplastic resin layer. Examiner respectfully disagrees. While Tai teaches a thermoplastic resin layer, Tai also teaches a gas barrier resin layer, which may be an ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer to further improve the gas barrier properties, wherein the content of ethylene units is preferably no less than 3 mol % and no greater than 70 mol % (Tai, paragraphs 0020-0021).
Applicant’s remaining arguments have been considered but are moot based on the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER Y CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-6730. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/PETER Y CHOI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights