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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 6 and 19, please write out the meaning of 6PPD, 7PPD and TMQ.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jacob (US 2023/0312874), based on a filing date of October 2, 2020.
Jacob discloses an aging stabilizer and/or antiozonant, shown below, for use in vehicle tires and/or technical rubber articles, where the rubber is listed to include natural rubber, polyisoprene, styrene-butadiene, polybutadiene rubber, etc. (p. 2, [0034] to p. 3, [0049]):
PNG
media_image1.png
122
364
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the claimed antidegradant when m=1, n=0, p=0, q=0, R1=H and R2 is an alkyl moiety.
Jacob discloses that the rubber mixture comprises at least one filler, which includes carbon black and silica (p. 3, [0050] to p. 4, [0069]).
Jacob also discloses that the rubber mixture is used in vulcanized form, where vulcanization is conducted in the presence of sulfur and/or sulfur donors with the aid of vulcanization accelerators (p. 5, [0095]-[0104]).
Jacob anticipates instant claims 1-5 and 12.
As to claim 6, Jacob discloses that the rubber mixture can further contain customary additives, which include 6PPD, 7PPD, antiozonant waxes and TMQ (p. 4, [0070] to p. 5, [0083]).
As to claim 7, Jacob discloses that the rubber mixture can include plasticizers such as oil plasticizers (p. 4, [0078]).
As to claims 8-9, Jacob discloses the aging stabilizer in an amount of preferably 1-5 phr (p. 2, [0031]).
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-11 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita (Antideterioration of 1-Chlorobutadiene-Butadiene Rubber by Using Rubber-Bound Antioxidants, Kobunshi Ronbunshu, 33(6), 1796, pp 317-322).
Yamashita exemplifies the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
396
284
media_image2.png
Greyscale
,
where RA-3 is the following antioxidant:
PNG
media_image3.png
144
196
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
RA-3 meets applicants’ antidegradant when m=1, p=0, q=0, n=0 and R1 and R2 are methyl groups, which is the same as 4-((4-(dimethylamino)phenyl)amino)phenol. CB-BR is chlorobutadiene-butadiene rubber and is a type of polybutadiene. HAF black is a carbon black reinforcing filler, and sulfur meets applicants’ vulcanization system.
Yamashita anticipates instant claims 1-5, 7-11 and 13-18.
Claims 6, 12 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita (Antideterioration of 1-Chlorobutadiene-Butadiene Rubber by Using Rubber-Bound Antioxidants, Kobunshi Ronbunshu, 33(6), 1796, pp 317-322), as applied above to claims 1-5, 7-11 and 13-18, and further in view of JP 5543143.
Yamashita anticipates instant claims 1-5, 7-11 and 13-18, as described above and applied herein as such, as Yamashita discloses a filled chlorobutadiene-butadiene copolymer rubber which is vulcanized in the presence of 4-((4-(dimethylamino)phenyl)amino)phenol.
Yamashita does not specifically teach the combination of the claimed antidegradant and the additional antioxidant, as claimed in instant claims 6 and 19.
Yamashita teaches that hindered phenols A-1 and RA-1 also provide the copolymer with resistance against deterioration. Using a combination of A-1 or RA-1 and RA-3 is prima facie obvious, as these compounds are functionally equivalent in the Yamashita reference, where A-1 and RA-1 are hindered phenols, as shown below:
PNG
media_image4.png
314
200
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Yamashita does not teach or suggest the composition as being suitable for use in tires, as claimed by instant claims 12 and 20.
JP ‘143 teaches a vulcanized glass fiber filled 1-chlorobutadiene-butadiene copolymer composition, teaching that it can be used in automobile tires.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used the composition of Yamashita in a tire, as JP ‘143 teaches that filled, vulcanized, chlorobutadiene-butadiene copolymer rubber compositions are suitable for use in tires.
Yamashita in view of JP ‘143 is prima facie obvious over instant claims 12 and 20.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIEANN R JOHNSTON whose telephone number is (571)270-7344. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571)272-1302. 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.
/Brieann R Johnston/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766