DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment and response filed on July 28, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 09, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In claim 7, line 1, the term “the random copolymers” lack proper antecedent basis. This rejection can be overcome by changing the dependency of claim 7 to claim 2.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asanuma et al. (US Pat No. 5,206,324) in view of Pellegatti et al. (US Pub 2010/0137543) and Gahleitner et al. (US Pub 2020/0317898).
Regarding claim 1, US ‘324 discloses a composition comprising component (a) a propylene-based copolymer; and component (b) a polybutene elastomer (Example 2). Component (a) and component (b) are melt-blended to form the composition (col 5, lines 13-20) and exhibit a haze value of 2.1% and a Young’s modulus of 68 kg/mm (Example 2; col 8, lines 54-61). Example 2 of US ‘324 discloses that the propylene-based copolymer has a tensile modulus within the presently claimed range.
US ‘324 is silent as to the tensile modulus of the polybutene elastomer. US ‘543, which is the US equivalent to WO2009/000637 that is cited in the present specification on page 9, line 1, discloses a polybutene elastomer that is useful to be blended with other polyolefin and polymeric products in order to modulate particular properties such a sealing strength, flexibility and softness of the plastic materials [0001]. As disclosed in the present specification [0034], the polybutene elastomer can be compositions within the scope of the disclosure of WO ‘637 [US ‘543]. Thus, the polybutene elastomers disclosed in US ‘543 would have the same properties as the present claims, i.e., both US ‘543 and the present invention use the same polybutene elastomers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have prepared the composition of modified US ‘324, wherein component (b) is a polybutene elastomer set forth in US ‘543 based on the disclosure in US ‘543 that the polybutene elastomer can be blended with other polymeric components in order to modulate desired properties, such as flexibility and softness.
The Young’s modulus, i.e., tensile modulus, of the blended composition disclosed in Example 2 is outside of the presently claimed range. US ‘898 discloses a similar composition comprising a propylene-based copolymer and an elastomer polymeric component wherein tensile modulus is below 320 MPa ([0251], Table 2). US ‘898 discloses that such a material having a low modulus is advantageous to create a material having desired softness for modern packaging applications [0005]. It would have been obvious to have prepared the composition of modified US ‘324, wherein the composition has a tensile modulus of less than 320 MPa, as taught by US ‘898, motivated by the desire to obtain a composition suitable for the use in the preparation of materials suitable for modern packaging applications.
Regarding claim 2, US ‘324 suggests that the composition can contain a blend of more than one copolymer (col 1, lines 8-11). Further, US ‘898 specifically discloses embodiments wherein two or more different propylene-based copolymers are used [0062]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have prepared the composition of modified US ‘324 wherein a propylene-based copolymer blend is used, as suggested in US ‘324 and explicitly taught in US ‘898, motivated by the desire to optimize the properties of the propylene-based copolymer component of the composition.
Regarding claim 3, US ‘324 discloses that the propylene-based copolymer can have a melt flow rate of 0.5 to 20.0 g/10 min (claim 3).
Regarding claim 5, Example 2 of US ‘324 discloses that the propylene-based copolymer has a tensile modulus within the presently claimed range.
Regarding claim 6, US ‘324 discloses that it is known that polypropylene-based resins are known for having superior glass properties (col 1, lines 43-44) and specifically discloses the films are low haze films (see Examples), which correlates to a high gloss film. But. US ‘324 is silent as to the composition having a GU of greater than or equal to 50 GU. Since the composition of US ‘324 would have a composition with the same scope as the present composition and are disclosed as being low haze films, it is reasonable to conclude that the gloss properties of the modified composition of US ‘324 would exhibit the same gloss properties as the presently claimed invention.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, US ‘898 discloses the claimed process steps of these product-by-process claims ([0124], [0125]). Further, these process steps do not appear to result in a materially different composition. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claims 9-12, US ‘324 is silent as to the melt flow rate (claim 9), density (claim 10), tensile modulus (claim 11), and tensile elongation at break (claim 12) of the polybutene elastomer. US ‘543, which is the US equivalent to WO2009/000637 that is cited in the present specification on page 9, line 1, discloses a polybutene elastomer that is useful to be blended with other polyolefin and polymeric products in order to modulate particular properties such a sealing strength, flexibility and softness of the plastic materials [0001]. As disclosed in the present specification [0034], the polybutene elastomer can be compositions within the scope of the disclosure of WO ‘637 [US ‘543]. Thus, the polybutene elastomers disclosed in US ‘543 would have the same properties as the present claims, i.e., both US ‘543 and the present invention use the same polybutene elastomers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have prepared the composition of modified US ‘324, wherein component (b) is a polybutene elastomer set forth in US ‘543 based on the disclosure in US ‘543 that the polybutene elastomer can be blended with other polymeric components in order to modulate desired properties, such as flexibility and softness.
Regarding claim 13, US ‘543 discloses that the polybutene elastomer is polymerized in a process comprising a metallocene catalyst ([0001], [0058]).
Regarding claim 14, Example 2 of US ‘324 discloses a blended composition that comprises 80 wt.% of component (a) and 20 wt.% of component (b).
Regarding claim 15, US ‘324 discloses that the composition can be used to form a film (col 5, lines 26-27).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asanuma et al. (US Pat No. 5,206,324) in view of Pellegatti et al. (US Pub 2010/0137543) and Gahleitner et al. (US Pub 2020/0317898) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jacob et al. (US Pat No 7,994,253).
Modified US ‘324 is silent as to the density of the propylene-based copolymer. US ‘253, which is also directed to blended compositions containing a propylene-based copolymer/terpolymer and an elastomer blend, discloses that it is conventional in the art to use propylene-based polymers having a density in the range of 0.85 to 0.92 g/cm3 (col 5, lines 3-5). US ‘253 discloses that such compositions are useful in manufacturing articles where good elastic recovery in an important attribute (col 10, lines 41-62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used a propylene-based polymer having a density within in the claimed range of 0.88 to 0.92 g/cm3, as taught in US ‘253, as the component (a) material of modified US ‘324, motivated by the desire to obtain a composition that was useful in the manufacture of articles that require good elastic recovery.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 28, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The objections and rejections not repeated above have been overcome by the present amendment and arguments. The present amendment incorporated previous claims 5 and 11 into independent claim 1; thus, the only relevant arguments are those directed to the rejection under 35 USC 103 over Asanuma et al. in view of Gahleitner et al. and Pellegratti et al. set forth in paragraph #24 of the April 29, 2026 Office action, i.e., Section VI of the present response (pgs 9 and 10). It is agreed that Asanuma et al. and Gahleitner et al. do not teach a polybutene elastomer having a tensile modulus ranging from 1 MPa to 100 MPa. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the argument that Pellegratti et al. does not cure the defects of Asanuma et al. in view of Gahleitner et al. As detailed above, Pellegratti et al., which is cited in the present specification (pg 9, line 1), discloses a polybutene elastomer that is useful to be blended with other polyolefin and polymeric products in order to modulate particular properties such a sealing strength, flexibility and softness of the plastic materials [0001]. As disclosed in the present specification [0034], the polybutene elastomer can be compositions within the scope of the disclosure of WO ‘637 [US ‘543]. Thus, the polybutene elastomers disclosed in US ‘543 would have the same properties as the present claims, i.e., both US ‘543 and the present invention use the same polybutene elastomers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have prepared the composition of modified US ‘324, wherein component (b) is a polybutene elastomer set forth in US ‘543 based on the disclosure in US ‘543 that the polybutene elastomer can be blended with other polymeric components in order to modulate desired properties, such as flexibility and softness.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Blaine Copenheaver whose telephone number is (571)272-1156. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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.
/BLAINE COPENHEAVER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights