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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on July 24, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
4. Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nowlin (WO 95/11264, of record).
Nowlin is directed to a composition designed, for example, to form an injected molded article and comprising a low molecular weight component and a high molecular weight component, wherein (a) said low molecular weight component is included in an amount between 0.01 and 0.99, (b) said low molecular weight component has a melt index MI between 0.1 and 20,000 (under 2.16 kg- corresponds with claimed I2.16), which fully encompasses the claimed range, (c) said low molecular weight component has a polydispersity index Mw/Mn that can vary between 2 and 30, (d) said high molecular weight is included in an amount between 0.01 and 0.99, (e) said high molecular weight component has a high load melt index between 0.005 and 50 (under 21.6 kg), and (f) said high molecular weight component has a polydispersity index (Mw/Mn) that can vary between 3 and 30 (Page 3, Lines 9-22, Page 4, Line 29+, and Page 17, Lines 13+). Nowlin also states the individual components or resins have a density between 0.89 and 0.97 (Page 4, Lines 18+), with a preferred range of densities between 0.94 and 0.97 that is fully encompassed by the claimed range. In such an instance, though, Nowlin is silent the melt index of the high molecular weight component at small loads.
It is noted, though, that the high molecular weight component of Nowlin has a high load melt index FI between 0.005 and 50 (corresponds with claimed I21.6 in claim 3) and a ratio between the high load melt index and the low load melt index is between 25 and 90 (Page 5, Lines 26+). This suggests a range of low melt index values (claimed I2.16) less than 2 (50/25) and such fully encompasses the claimed range.
With further respect to claim 1 (and claim 9), the claimed relationship between respective shrinkage anisotropies would have been expected to be present in the overall composition of Nowlin since the low molecular weight component and the high molecular weight component in Nowlin are directly analogous to those detailed by Applicant (claimed anisotropies appear to necessarily result from using components having loadings and properties as required by the claims). It is also noted that Applicant has not provided a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the claimed relationship since Table 4 simply includes shrinkage anisotropy values for the overall composition and there is no disclosure regarding the shrinkage anisotropy of the low molecular weight component.
Lastly, with respect to claim 1, MPEP 2144.05 states that “prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed range ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close”. In such an instance, a high load melt index of 50 for the high weight molecular weight component is seen to be extremely close to the claimed high load melt index of 53 for the high weight molecular weight component. Thus, a prima facie case of obviousness exists in view of Nowlin. Additionally, when looking at Titanium Metals Corp. of America v Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) and In re Dreyfus, 73 F.2d 931, 0934, 24 USPQ 52, 55 (CCPA 1934), it is evident that a prima facie case of obviousness is in fact supported when a claimed range is merely close to the prior art as is the case with Nowlin and the pending claims.
Regarding claims 2 and 4-6, given that the low molecular weight component of Nowlin can have a molecular weight between 0.1 and 20,000 and respective components can have a variety of polydispersity index values, it reasons that (a) the high molecular weight component would have a number molecular weight greater than 11,000 and a weight average molecular weight between 90,000 and 175,000 and (b) the low molecular weight component would have a number average molecular weight less than 11,000 and a weight average molecular weight less than 90,000 (Page 5, Lines 32+).
With respect to claim 3, as noted above, a high load melt index of the high molecular weight component of 53 is prima facie obviousness in view of Nowlin (when considering MPEP 2144.05).
As to claim 7, Nowlin teaches an overall density between 0.89 and 0.97 (Page 3, Lines 9+) and such fully encompasses the claimed range.
Regarding claim 11, the general disclosure of containers would have been recognized as including container closures.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at 571-270-5545. 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.
Justin Fischer
/JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 July 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights