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 .
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 11 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.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "formula Z" in the second line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Formula Z is never defined and it is unclear what formula Z is. Note that while claim 5 comprises formula Z, claim 11 does not depend upon 5 (which is a process claim).
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) 1, 3, 5-10, 14 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2011/0251329 (herein Ness).
As to claims 1, 3, 5, 10, and 15-16, Ness discloses a process of producing a polymeric dispersion, block copolymers thereof and dispersion thereof (see abstract and examples) comprising via nitroxide mediated controlled living free radical emulsion polymerization (see paragraph 2-3, 5, and 45), such as via Blocbuildiner, which has SG1 and is attached via the nitroxide (#) of the structure below, which reads on the nitroxyl of claimed formula Z of claim 5, wherein R1=C3 alkyl substituted by PO3Rz2, Rz=C2 alkyl, R2=C4 alkyl, and R3=H, R5=R6=R7=C1 alkyl. Also note that this is identical to nitroxide Zf on page 7 of the originally filed specification.
PNG
media_image1.png
217
302
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
197
440
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The polymerization of butyl acrylate (BA), styrene, methyl methacrylate in the presence of a diblock copolymer (see paragraph 61) of block of 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropanesulfonic acid (AMPSNa, reading on a second block comprising an ethylenically unsaturated monomer with sulfonic acid groups) and a block consisting (100%) of butyl acrylate (BA, alkyl acrylate of at least 80 wt%). Note that the in example 1, the second block with sulfonic groups is first polymerized in paragraph 59, the first block with alkyl acrylate blocks is polymerized in paragraph 60 and the monomer composition is polymerized in paragraph 61. Also note the other examples, that read on the claimed invention. Note that example 1 utilizes SG1 (nitroxide).
All limitations are met.
As to claim 6, In example 1, 16.8 g BA is polymerized at 95% conversion,
so BA reacted: mBA,rxn=16.8×0.95=15.96 g nBA,rxn=128.1715.96=0.1245 mol
BB-MA defines chain count, the number of living chains in the portion of macroinitiator solution used is proportional to how much of the macroinitiator batch charged.
Macroinitiator batch total mass: 389.29+2.265+481.515+24.805+17.296+178.71=1093.881 g
Of that, 80.4 g of that solution, so the fraction is: f=80.4/1093.881=0.07350
Total chains in the full batch = 0.0650 mol, so chains charged into latex reactor: nchains=0.0650×0.07350=0.00478 mol
Degree of polymerization of the BA block: DPn(BA)= 0.1245/0.00478=26.0
Therefore, about 26 butyl acrylate repeat units per chain, which is within the claimed range.
As to claim 7, as deduced for claim 26, the first block (BA) is 26 units. Paragraph 59 of example states that the second block (AMPSNa) is 3 kg/mol, thus is about 13 units (3000/230). Therefore, the ratio is about 2:1, which is within the claimed range.
As to claim 8, example 1 discloses that 752 g of the latex (which is 4.8% solids) is used for a total of about 36.1 g of block copolymer. Further, 424.2 g BA, 35 g Styrene and 224 g MMA, for a total of 683.2 g monomer is I polymerized. Therefore, about 5.3 parts of the block copolymer (36/683.2) is present based on 100 parts of the total monomers.
As to claim 9, the process is a feed method. See paragraph 56 and examples.
As to claim 14, the polymer is used in emulsion polymerization of the third block and is amphiphilic (emulsifying properties), thus would also act as a emulsifying agent in the polymerization. See abstract, paragraph 16 and examples.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9, 11, 12 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2011/0207841 (herein Kosar).
As to claim 11, Kosar discloses similar block copolymers. See example 2. Specifically, example 2 is a diblock copolymer comprising a block of methyl methacrylate (MA, which is 100%) and a block of sodium styrene sulfonate (SSNa). The block copolymer is prepared using Blockbuilder, thus has a nitroxyl radical at a terminus.
As to claim 12, the first block is prepared with 600 g methyl acrylate to 70% and the second block is prepared with 30 g methyl acrylate and 50 g sodium styrene sulfonate and the remainder of the 600 g (30%), which is polymerized to 75%. Therefore, the first block is 4.88 mol ((0.7*600)/86) and the second block is about 2.07 mol (0.75*(0.3*600/86+22.5/86+50/206). Thus, the ratio is about 2:1.
As to claim 15, aqueous polymer dispersions are taught. See paragraph 45 and examples.
As to claims 1-2, 4-5, 7 and 16, Kosar teaches that the block copolymers may be triblocks, thus after the diblock is formed, additional monomer is added and the reaction is polymerized. See paragraph 22. A block copolymer would be produced sequentially as taught by Kosar and thus, the block copolymer of example 2, with a nitroxide on the second block, would be polymerized further in the presence of monomers and thereby reading on the claims. An aqueous polymer dispersions of the polymer are taught. See paragraph 45 and examples. The examples utilize Blocbuildiner, which has SG1 and is attached via the nitroxide (#) of the structure below, which reads on the nitroxyl of claimed formula Z of claim 5, wherein R1=C3 alkyl substituted by PO3Rz2, Rz=C2 alkyl, R2=C4 alkyl, and R3=H, R5=R6=R7=C1 alkyl. Also note that this is identical to nitroxide Zf on page 7 of the originally filed specification.
As to claim 9, the emulsion polymerization is a feed process. See examples.
As to claim 14, the polymer is used in emulsion polymerization of the third block and is amphiphilic (emulsifying properties), thus would also act as a emulsifying agent in the polymerization. See abstract, and 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.
Claim(s) 4 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0251329 (herein Ness) in view of US 2011/0207841 (herein Kosar).
The discussion with respect to Ness set-forth above is incorporated herein by reference.
As to claims 4 and 12, Ness teaches that the sulfonic acid monomer is 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropanesulfonic acid (see paragraph 20-22 and examples) not the claimed monomers.
Kosar teaches similar methods of producing similar block copolymers having sulfonic acid monomer blocks and alkyl acrylate blocks utilizing nitroxide free radical polymerization. See abstract and examples. Kosar teaches that 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropanesulfonic acid and salts thereof (AMPS, 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropanesulfonate) are interchangeable with styrene sulfonic acid and salts (SSA) thereof. See paragraph 24 and 37.
Case law has established that it is prima facie obvious to substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007). MPEP 2143, rationale (B). In the present case, it is evident that Ness differs from the presently claimed process and polymer by the substitution of SSA for AMPS. Additionally, it is evident that the substituted component is known in the art, as both are taught in Kosar. Additionally, it is evident that a person of ordinary skill in the art could have of substituted in SSA for AMPS and that the results of the substitution (a sulfonic acid monomer) would have been predictable. In light of this discussion, it is apparent that the presently claimed invention is arrived at by simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the present invention to have the substituted SSA for AMPS as suggested by Kosar, and thereby arriving at the presently claimed invention. Additionally, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to have substituted SSA for AMPS because Kosar teaches that each is suitable and interchangeable.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0251329 (herein Ness) in view of US 2002/0061988 (herein Klaerner)
The discussion with respect to Ness set-forth above is incorporated herein by reference.
As to claim 11, Ness is silent on the specific nitroxide.
Klaerner discloses similar block copolymers and methods. See abstract and examples. Klaerner discloses that the nitroxide may be the structure below:
PNG
media_image3.png
210
190
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, which reads on the claimed X group CH2CH3-Phenyl when the nitroxide disassociates and initiates the polymer at one end, with the nitroxyl group at the other terminus. See paragraph 99, 52, and examples.
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention to have modified the nitroxide of Ness with the nitroxide of Klaerner because one would want to utilize alternative nitroxides that are taught in Klaerner as having a balance between reaction time and living character. See paragraph 13.
Claim(s) 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0251329 (herein Ness) in view of US 2004/0176553 (herein Nesvadba).
The discussion with respect to Ness set-forth above is incorporated herein by reference.
As to claims 11 and 13, Ness is silent on the specific nitroxide.
Nesvadba discloses similar methods and polymers produced via utilizing nitroxide mediated polymerization. See abstract and examples. Nesvadba teaches that the nitroxide may have the structure below.
PNG
media_image4.png
302
188
media_image4.png
Greyscale
, which reads on the claimed X group CH2CH3-Phenyl when the nitroxide disassociates and initiates the polymer at one end, with the nitroxyl group at the other terminus reading on the first structure in claim 13. See paragraph 99, 52, and examples.
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention to have modified the nitroxide of Ness with the nitroxide of Nitroxide because one would want to utilize alternative nitroxides that are taught in Nesvadba because one would want to utilize nitrioxides taught as having high purity, yield, of industrial value that are thermally stable and can be stored. See paragraph 5-8 of Nesvadba.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0207841 (herein Kosar).
The discussion with respect to Kosar set-forth above is incorporated herein by reference.
As to claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9 and 16, as discussed above, Kosar teaches that the block copolymers may be triblocks, thus after the diblock is formed, additional monomer is added and the reaction is polymerized. See paragraph 22. While there is no claim directed towards this situation, paragraph 22 states that block copolymers of Kosar can include triblocks and so on, wherein each block is a random block. Further, the examples show that the polymers are produced sequentially. Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to utilize example 2 to prepare an additional block for complexity and additional features because paragraph 22 states that such processes/polymers are envisaged.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK S KAUCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-7340. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6 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, Arrie 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.
/MARK S KAUCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764