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 without traverse of Group I, claims 17-29 in the reply filed on 12/16/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 30-34 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 12/16/2025.
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.
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 19 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 19 recites the broad recitation chemicals, and the claim also recites other organic materials, which are all chemicals, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claims 26-29 are 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. Claim 26 is indefinite for the following reasons:
1) A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 26 recites several broad recitations followed by narrower statements of the range/limitation. They are too numerous to list. One example is “halogen-comprising polymers and the narrower limitation of copolymers of vinyl chloride and vinylidene chloride. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
2) The limitation “polymer blends also long-chain branched polypropylene copolymers” is indefinite. The polymer blends are indefinite, and it is unclear what is intended by “also”.
3) The limitation “and blends with polystyrene or polyamides” under f) is indefinite since it is not clarified what is included in the blends, or particularly what is blended with polystyrene or polyamides.
4) The limitation “and blends” under m) is indefinite. It is unclear which polymers are being blended.
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.
Claim(s) 17-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taira (JP 03-227938A).
Regarding claims 17-25: Taira teaches a method of adding dehydrodieugenol in the claimed amount as an antioxidant to stabilize an organic material (methyl linoleate or a membrane lipid) that is a chemical (page 3, Examples).
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(s) 17-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Candau et al. (FR 2918560 A1).
Regarding claims 17-25: Candau et al. teach a method of stabilizing an organic material (a dibenzoylmethane derivative) comprising incorporating into the material a photostabilizing agent (pages 12, 19, abstract; examples). Candau et al. teach incorporating 0.1 to 10 wt% of a compound of formula XV as a photostabilizing agent (page 19). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select dehydrodieugenol (page 19) as the photostabilizing agent in the method of Candau et al.
Regarding claim 26: Candau et al. teach that their method includes silicones and polymers of olefins (pages 9-11, and 22-25).
Regarding claim 27-28: Candau et al. teach at least one of the claimed additives (page 22; Example).
Regarding claim 29: Candau et al. teach the claimed amount of stearate (lubricant) (page 25).
Claim(s) 17-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hikima (JP 10-194961A).
Regarding claims 17-25: Hikima teaches a method of stabilizing an organic material comprising incorporating a biphenyl compound in the claimed amount [0005; Examples]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select dehydrodieugenol [0015] as the biphenyl compound in Hikima.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN USELDING whose telephone number is (571)270-5463. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am to 6:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN E USELDING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763