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 claims 1-8 in the reply filed on March 28, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 9-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 28, 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 27, 2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Office.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 24, 2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Office.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (CN 108084707, English translation provided for citations, hereinafter referred to as “Liu”).
As to Claim 1: Liu teaches a nylon material composition which comprises (Example 5, [0052]-[0054]):
nylon 10,12 and nylon 6 (i.e., a base resin including a first polyamide and a second polyamide wherein the first polyamide is aliphatic (nylon 6) and the second polyamide is an aliphatic polyamide having more carbon atoms per amide group in a polyamide repeating unit than the first polyamide (nylon 10,12))
POE-G, a grafted polyolefin elastomer toughening agent (i.e., an impact resistant material)
a compounding additive including antioxidant 1098 and antioxidant 168 ([0013]), and
a compounding additive including EBS lubricant (ethylene bis(stearamide), i.e., a release agent).
The CR value derived from the claimed Equation 1 for nylon 10,12 and nylon 6 is:
C
R
=
#
c
a
r
b
o
n
a
t
o
m
s
p
e
r
a
m
i
d
e
i
n
s
e
c
o
n
d
p
o
l
y
a
m
i
d
e
r
.
u
.
#
c
a
r
b
o
n
a
t
o
m
s
p
e
r
a
m
i
d
e
i
n
f
i
r
s
t
p
o
l
y
a
m
i
d
e
r
.
u
.
=
11
6
≈
1.83
which is within the claimed range.
As to Claim 3: Liu teaches the composition of claim 1 (supra).
Liu teaches an exemplary composition comprising 40 kg nylon 10,12 (i.e., corresponding to the claimed second polyamide) and 60 kg of nylon 6 (i.e., corresponding to the claimed first polyamide) ([0054]), which is within the claimed range.
As to Claim 4: Liu teaches the composition of claim 1 (supra).
Liu further teaches wherein the composition comprises nylon 6 ([0054]) (i.e., polyamide 6).
As to Claim 5: Liu teaches the composition of claim 1 (supra).
Liu further teaches wherein the composition comprises nylon 10,12 ([0054]) (i.e., polyamide 10,12).
As to Claim 7: Liu teaches the composition of claim 1 (supra).
Liu further teaches wherein the composition comprises compounding additive antioxidant 168 ([0013]), the structure1 of which reads on the claimed phosphite-based antioxidant.
As to Claim 8: Liu teaches the composition of claim 1 (supra).
Liu further teaches wherein the composition comprises a compounding additive including EBS lubricant (ethylene bis(stearamide) ([0013]).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (CN 108084707, English translation provided for citations, hereinafter referred to as “Liu”).
As to Claim 2: Liu teaches the composition of claim 1 (see above).
Liu teaches an exemplary composition comprising an impact modifier (POE-G) in an amount of 20 parts by weight relative to 100 parts of a first and second nylon (Example 5), which is within the claimed range. Liu teaches wherein the composition comprises compounding additive blend consisting of a primary antioxidant 1098, secondary antioxidant 168, light stabilizer 622, and lubricant EBS mixed in a ratio of 1:2:1:2, respectively ([0013]). Liu further teaches exemplary compositions comprising a first and second nylon totaling 100 parts and a range for an amount of compounding additive that is 0.5 to 2 parts (Examples 1-6). Thus, for a compounding additive of 0.5 parts, the primary and secondary antioxidant blend is present in an amount of 0.25 pbw, which is within the claimed range (i.e., wherein the antioxidant comprises 3 out 6 total parts of the compounding additive). Furthermore, when accounting for the range of compounding additives (0.5 to 2 parts, Examples 1-6), the amount of an EBS which reads on the claimed release agent may be from about 0.167 when the compounding additive is present at 0.5 pbw to about 0.667 when the compounding additive is present in an amount of 2 pbw (i.e., wherein the EBS comprises 2 out of 6 total parts of the compounding additive), which overlaps with the claimed range. Therefore, the ranges for the corresponding claimed components are found to overlap with the claimed ranges. In the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). See MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have used the overlapping portion of the claimed range, and the motivation to have done so would have been, as Liu suggests, that the overlapping portion is a usable range for conventionally known compounding additives for polyamide blends to achieve desired properties (e.g., lubrication for mold processing and resistance to stabilization).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (CN 108084707, English translation provided for citations, hereinafter referred to as “Liu”) in view of Fukui et al. (US 20090203845, hereinafter referred to as “Fukui”).
As to Claim 6: Liu teaches the composition of claim 1 (see above).
Liu teaches wherein the composition comprises a POE-G, a grafted polyolefin elastomer toughening agent (i.e., an impact resistant material), but is silent towards the functionality of the graft copolymer.
Fukui teaches a related polyamide resin composition suitable for forming hydrogen tank liner material comprising a blend of polyamide and copolyimide, further comprising an impact-resistant material that is an acid modified olefin-based copolymer (Abstract). Fukui further teaches wherein the acid functionalization is selected based on affinity for polyamide resins and may be, inter alia, maleic anhydride ([0040]). Liu and Fukui are considered analogous art because they are directed towards the same field of endeavor, namely injection moldable impact modified polyamide resin blends. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a graft functionality that is maleic anhydride for the polyolefin elastomer of Liu and the motivation would have been that such a species of graft functionality is known within the art as suitable for the intended purpose of a grafting species for polyolefin elastomers. It has been found that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination — see MPEP 2144.07. Furthermore, Fukui teaches that selection of a grafting species that is maleic anhydride improves affinity of POE impact modifiers within polyamide resins, which further improves impact resistance of the resultant composition ([0039]).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CULLEN L. G. DAVIDSON IV whose telephone number is (703)756-1073. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:00.
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, Mark Eashoo can be reached on (571) 272-1197. 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.
/C.L.G.D./ Examiner, Art Unit 1767
/Andrew J. Oyer/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767
1 Chemical Book CAS Database – Antioxidant 168
Prosecution Insights