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. 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 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. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group II, claims 12, 14, 15 and 20 in the reply filed on 9/8/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground s that Lyons et al. does not teach polyvinyl acetate acrylate . This is not found persuasive because evidence of lack of unity between the groups is found in the combination of Noda et al. (US Patent Application No. 2020/0269554) and Branston et al. (US Patent Application No. 2010/0190012), wherein it is found to disclose the technical features in common between the groups. As such, the technical features in common of the claimed invention are not found to be special, since they do not define a contribution over the prior art. Noda et al. teach a coating color composition (page 2, paragraph [0024], page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]), wherein the coating color composition comprises 50 parts by weight or more and 2000 parts by weight or less, more preferably 65 parts by weight or more and 1000 parts by weight or less of pigments (page 5, paragraph [0095]) selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, clay, satin white, barium sulfate, talc and kaolin (page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]). Branston et al. teach a polyvinyl acetate acrylate latex based coating color composition (page 1, paragraphs [0018], [0019], page 5, paragraphs [0105], [0106]), wherein the coating color composition comprises pigments selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, gypsum, clay, talc and kaolin and mixtures thereof (page 1, paragraphs [0018]-[0020], page 4, paragraph [0102]) and from about 5 to about 60% or more, more preferably from about 5 to about 40%, and most preferably from about 10 to about 40% by weight of polyvinyl acetate-acrylate latex (page 5, paragraphs [0106], [0109]). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Objections Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the word “multi-layered” is misspelled as “ lulti -layered”. Appropriate correction is required. 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 12 , 14, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noda et al. (US Patent Application No. 2020/0269554) in view of Branston et al. (US Patent Application No. 2010/0190012). Regarding claim 12, Noda et al. teach a heat sealable multiple layer paperboard (page 4, paragraph [0078], page 8, paragraph [0129], page 9, paragraph [0148]) comprising a coating color composition on the paperboard (page 2, paragraph [0024], page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]) including 50 parts by weight or more and 2000 parts by weight or less, more preferably 65 parts by weight or more and 1000 parts by weight or less of pigments (page 5, paragraph [0095]) selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, clay, satin white, barium sulfate, talc and kaolin (page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]). Noda et al. fail to teach wherein the coating comprises 10-20 parts of one or more binders comprising polyvinyl acetate acrylate latex, wherein the polyvinyl acetate acrylate latex comprises 30-100% by dry weight of the one or more binders. However, Branston et al. teach a composition for coating paperboard (page 1, paragraph [0018]) comprising a pigment s selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, gypsum, clay, talc and kaolin and mixtures thereof ( pa ge 1, paragraph s [0018]- [0020] , page 4, paragraph [0102]) and from about 5 to about 60% or more, more preferably from about 5 to about 40%, and most preferably from about 10 to about 40% by weight of polyvinyl acetate-acrylate latex (page 5, paragraphs [0106], [0109]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the polyvinyl acetate acrylate of Branston et al. on the paperboard of Noda et al. in order to assist in holding the pigment particles together and to the paperboard substrate ( Branston et al., page 5, paragraph [0 107 ]). The product-by-process limitation “obtainable by a method according to claim 1” would not be expected to impart distinctive structural characteristics to the paperboard. The product itself does not depend on the process of making it. MPEP 2113. It can therefore be ascertained that the paperboard of Noda et al., as modified by Branston et al. possesses the same characteristics as the Applicant’s claimed paperboard. Regarding claim 14, Noda et al. teach a coating color composition (page 2, paragraph [0024], page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]) , wherein the coating color composition comprises 50 parts by weight or more and 2000 parts by weight or less, more preferably 65 parts by weight or more and 1000 parts by weight or less of pigments which reads on Applicant’s claimed 100 parts of pigments (page 5, paragraph [0095]) selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, clay, satin white, barium sulfate, talc and kaolin (page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]). Noda et al. fail to teach wherein the composition is a polyvinyl acetate acrylate latex based coating color composition comprising 10-20 parts of one or more binders comprising the polyvinyl acetate acrylate latex, wherein the polyvinyl acetate acrylate latex comprises 30-100% by dry weight of the one or more binders. However, Branston et al. teach a polyvinyl acetate acrylate latex based coating color composition (page 1, paragraphs [0018], [0019], page 5, paragraphs [0105], [0106]) , wherein the coating color composition comprises pigments selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, gypsum, clay, talc and kaolin and mixtures thereof (page 1, paragraphs [0018]-[0020], page 4, paragraph [0102]) and from about 5 to about 60% or more, more preferably from about 5 to about 40%, and most preferably from about 10 to about 40% by weight of polyvinyl acetate-acrylate latex which reads on Applicant’s claimed range of 10-20 parts of one or more binders comprising 30-100% by dry weight of the one or more binders (page 5, paragraphs [0106], [0109]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the polyvinyl acetate acrylate of Branston et al. in the composition of Noda et al. in order to assist in holding the pigment particles together and to the paperboard substrate (Noda et al., page 5, paragraph [0 107 ]). The limitation “suitable for improving heat sealability of a multi-layered paperboard" is deemed to be a statement with regard to intended use and is not further limiting in so far as the structure of the product is concerned. In article claims, a claimed intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. MPEP 2111.02. The composition of Noda et al., as modified by Branston et al., is capable of improving the heat sealability of a multi-layered paperboard in that it contains the same constituents and displays the same characteristics as claimed by Applicant. Regarding claims 15 and 20, Noda et al. teach wherein the composition comprises styrene butadiene (page 4, paragraph [0086]). Claim s 14, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Branston et al. (US Patent Application No. 2010/0190012) in view of Noda et al. (US Patent Application No. 2020/0269554). Regarding claim 14, Branston et al. teach a polyvinyl acetate acrylate latex based coating color composition (page 1, paragraphs [0018], [0019], page 5, paragraphs [0105], [0106]) , wherein the coating color composition comprises pigments selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, gypsum, clay, talc and kaolin and mixtures thereof (page 1, paragraphs [0018]-[0020], page 4, paragraph [0102]) and from about 5 to about 60% or more, more preferably from about 5 to about 40%, and most preferably from about 10 to about 40% by weight of polyvinyl acetate-acrylate latex which reads on Applicant’s claimed range of 10-20 parts of one or more binders comprising 30-100% by dry weight of the one or more binders (page 5, paragraphs [0106], [0109]). Branston et al. fail to teach wherein the composition comprises 100 parts of pigments. However, Noda et al. teach a coating color composition (page 2, paragraph [0024], page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]), wherein the coating color composition comprises 50 parts by weight or more and 2000 parts by weight or less, more preferably 65 parts by weight or more and 1000 parts by weight or less of pigments which reads on Applicant’s claimed 100 parts of pigments (page 5, paragraph [0095]) selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, clay, satin white, barium sulfate, talc and kaolin (page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the amount of pigments of Noda et al. in the composition of Branston et al. in order to enhance water vapor barrier property (Noda et al., page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0091]). The limitation “suitable for improving heat sealability of a multi-layered paperboard" is deemed to be a statement with regard to intended use and is not further limiting in so far as the structure of the product is concerned. In article claims, a claimed intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. MPEP 2111.02. The composition of Branston et al., as modified by Noda et al., is capable for improving the heat sealability of a multi-layered paperboard in that it contains the same constituents and displays the same characteristics as claimed by Applicant. Regarding claims 15 and 20, Branston et al. fail to teach wherein the composition compris es synthetic polymers selected from the group consisting of styrene butadiene latex, styrene acrylate latex, ethylene vinyl acetate latex and vinyl acetate latex. However, Noda et al. teach a coating color composition (page 2, paragraph [0024], page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]), wherein the coating color composition comprises 50 parts by weight or more and 2000 parts by weight or less, more preferably 65 parts by weight or more and 1000 parts by weight or less of pigments (page 5, paragraph [0095]) selected from calcium carbonate, titanium dioxide, clay, satin white, barium sulfate, talc and kaolin (page 5, paragraphs [0089], [0090]) and styrene butadiene (page 4, paragraph [0086]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the styrene butadiene of Noda et al. in the composition of Branston et al. in order to provide water vapor barrier property (Noda et al., page 4 , paragraph [008 6 ]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHINESSA GOLDEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5543 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday; 8:00 - 4:00 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Alicia Chevalier can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-1490 . 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair . 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. /Chinessa T. Golden/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 12/12/2025