Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/261,768

METHOD FOR PRODUCING MOLDED BODY CONTAINING POLY-3-HYDROXYBUTYRATE-BASED RESIN, AND USE OF SAME

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jul 17, 2023
Examiner
BOYD, JENNIFER A
Art Unit
1786
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Suntory Holdings Limited
OA Round
2 (Final)
30%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 30% of cases
30%
Career Allow Rate
66 granted / 217 resolved
-34.6% vs TC avg
Strong +50% interview lift
Without
With
+50.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
239
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
47.3%
+7.3% vs TC avg
§102
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
§112
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 217 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Amendment Applicant's amendments and remarks filed on October 16, 2025 have been entered and considered. Claims 1 and 9 have been amended and claims 1 – 14 are pending. In light of Applicant’s amendments, the previously set forth rejection has been modified below. The invention as currently claimed is not found to be patentable for reasons herein below. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments submitted October 16, 2025 have been considered and are not considered to be persuasive for the reasons below: Applicant argues that in JP2004-091684 describes that a thermoplastic polyester content is preferably not more than 100 parts by weight and not less 0.1 by weight [0042]. While the Examiner agrees that Applicant correctly construes that particular paragraph in the reference, the claim is not worded to exclude this. Regarding the limitation of “wherein a content of the poly-3-hydrobutyrate based-resin is at least 51 wt%”, the above discussed blends in JP2004-091684 meet Applicant’s requirement because the claim does not require that the resin contains at least 51% 3-hydrobutyrate polymer but rather based-resin which does not preclude including the amount of the other resin the blend. Thus, all of the disclosed blends in the prior art would be 100% poly-3-hydrobutyrate based-resin. Applicant argues that JP2004-091684 teaches a preform temperature of 10 degrees C (see Example 1) while amended claim requires that the temperature for the mold for obtaining the preform is from 35 to 100 degrees C. JP 2004-091684 also discloses using an injection stretch blow molding method which is preferred among the methods [0068]. In the injection stretch blow molding method, the resin is heated, melted and injection molded and then subjected to a blow molding method where the composition is not cooled inbetween and the temperature is preferably increased [0068-0076]. The temperature of the preform is uniformly set at 65 – 150 degrees C and does not fall below 60 C [0074]. The applied prior art meets Applicant’s limitation. Applicant’s arguments regarding unexpected and surprising results are not persuasive as they are not commensurate in scope with the claims as discussed above. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Claims 1 – 4 and 6 - 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2004-091684 (cited/English translation provided in IDS dated 10/17/2023) as evidenced by Chapter 8 - Market Characterization Biopolymers, pages 338 - 339 from book titled Engineering Biopolymers - Markets, Manufacturing, Properties and Applications. JP 2004-091684 is directed to a blow molded article having excellent mechanical properties, heat-resistance, impact resistance, gas-barrier properties and transparency and the method for production of the article [Overview], Problem to be solved, page 4). As to claims 1 - 3 and 9, JP 2004-091684 teach manufacturing a hollow molded article such a bottle that is injection stretch blown [0013]. The article is made of a resin composition comprising a polylactic caid and a polyacetal resin [0014]. The resin may further contain a thermoplastic polyester resin [0036], in particular polyhydroxyalkanoates such as polyhydroxy butyric acid and copolymers of B-hydroxy butyric acid with B-hydroxy valeric acid among other polyesters [0040] and [0042]. Additionally, polybutylene succinate/adipate is preferred [0040]. The polymers may be used alone or combination of two or more [0042]. For the process of making the hollow molded article, JP 2004-091684 discloses using an injection stretch blow molding method which is preferred among the methods [0068]. In the injection stretch blow molding method, the resin is heated, melted and injection molded and then subjected to a blow molding method where the composition is not cooled inbetween and the temperature is preferably increased [0068-0076]. The mold temperature is uniformly set at 65 – 150 degrees C and does not fall below 60 C [0074]. In the Examples, JP 2004-091684 teach the inclusion of “Biogreen” manufactured by Mitsubishi Gas Chemical Co.which is a polyhydroxybutyrate [0091]. In Chapter 8 pages 338 - 339 of the book titled Engineering Biopolymers - Markets, Manufacturing, Properties and Applications, Biogreen is a 3-hydroxybutyrate bio-degradable plastic material. Regarding the limitation of “wherein a content of the poly-3-hydrobutyrate based-resin is at least 51 wt%”, the above discussed blends met Applicant’s requirement because the claim does not require that the resin contains at least 51% 3-hydrobutyrate but rather based-resin which does not preclude including the amount of the other resin the blend. Thus, all of the disclosed blends in the prior art would be 100% poly-3-hydrobutyrate based-resin. Regarding the limitation of marine degradable in claims 8 and 9, claim 8 of JP 2004-091684 indicates that the composition is biodegradable resin composition. Additionally, Applicant does not define the term in the Specification. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the blow molded article of JP 2004-091684 can be considered to be marine degradable as no particular length of time, conditions of degradability, extent of degradation etc. are specified and other components are not excluded that would allow for degrading. Thus, the prior art is considered to be capable of being marine degradable. As to the thickness, JP 2004-091684 teaches that the thickness of 0.25 cm [0093]. JP 2004-091684 teach the use of preferably polyhydroxyalkanoates specifically 3-hydroxybutyrate bio-degradable plastic material as discussed above and additionally teach the use of polybutylene succinate/adipate, however, fail to exemplify specifically 3-hydroxybutyrate and polybutylene succinate/adipate together. However, to one of ordinary skill in the art, it would have been obvious to select these materials since they are preferred and would have the predictable result of a blow molded article having excellent mechanical properties, heat-resistance, impact resistance, gas-barrier properties and transparency and the method for production of the article [Overview], Problem to be solved, page 4) absent the showing of unexpected results. See MPEP 2143. Claims 5, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2004-091684 (cited/English translation provided in IDS dated 10/17/2023) as evidenced by Chapter 8 - Market Characterization Biopolymers, pages 338 - 339 from book titled Engineering Biopolymers - Markets, Manufacturing, Properties and Applications as applied above, in view of JP 2005/162884. JP 2004-091684 as evidenced by Chapter 8 - Market Characterization Biopolymers, pages 338 - 339 from book titled Engineering Biopolymers - Markets, Manufacturing, Properties and Applications teach the claimed limitations above but fail to specify that the poly-3-hydroxybutyrate above is specifically a poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyhexanoate) as required by claims 5, 13 and 14. JP 2005/162884 teach an environmentally friendly film having gas-barrier properties and excellent biodegradability (Abstract). JP 2005/162884 teach that poly (3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyhexanoate) (hereinafter referred to as PHBH), was found to possess a good balance of both gas barrier properties such as oxygen and water vapor and flexibility (page 3, 4th paragraph). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use poly (3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyhexanoate) as taught by JP 2005/162884 as the polyhydroxyalkanoate of JP 2005/162884 to have a blow molded article having excellent mechanical properties, heat-resistance, impact resistance, gas-barrier properties and transparency along with good balance of both gas barrier properties such as oxygen and water vapor and flexibility (page 3, 4th paragraph). Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A BOYD whose telephone number is (571)272-7783. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 pm with alternating Fridays off. 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, Sri Kumar can be reached at (571) 272-7769. 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. /JENNIFER A BOYD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 17, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 16, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 11, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 31, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 31, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601107
ENVIRONMENTAL-FRIENDLY ARTIFICIAL LEATHER AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12583189
BONDING FOR HIGH-TEMPERATURE COMPOSITE APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580175
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SECONDARY BATTERY AND SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570070
LAYERED BODY AND LAYERING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12531315
Unit Cell And Battery Cell Including The Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
30%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+50.3%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 217 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month