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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/9/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The rejections still apply as presented previously. No amendment has been filed.
The Applicant posits in the Remarks that the viscoelastic properties the claimed polymer are not determined solely by the monomer composition (styrene/butadiene), but are the result of controlling a complex microstructure such as the composition, microstructure, molecular weight, or end functional group (polymerization initiation end or polymerization termination end) of the polymer. It is the Office’s position that Applicant should then claim the complex microstructure because the composition that is claimed is taught by the reference. Applicant’s assertion that the G’ and tanδ values have effects on battery performance still considered a new property of an old material since the claimed material is taught. Applicant asserts that Table 1 evidences that not all similar materials, e.g., Comparative Examples 1 and 2, have the claimed properties but Table 1 also proves that the known materials have the claimed properties, as well.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sone (US 2013/0260241 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sone discloses a composition comprising: a copolymer comprising 1,3-butadiene (paragraph 60) and styrene (paragraph 62). Something which is old does not become patentable upon the discovery of a new property (MPEP 2112 I). The manner in which the properties are measured does not change the intrinsic properties.
Regarding claim 2, the instant specification states that α is the hydrogenation ratio (paragraph 90). Sone discloses a hydrogenation ratio of .65 (paragraph 199).
Regarding claim 3, Sone discloses that the styrene content is 0-50% (paragraph 62).
Regarding claim 4, Sone discloses a functional group containing a nitrogen atom, an oxygen atom, a silicon atom, a germanium atom, a tin atom or a combination thereof (paragraph 20).
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 IMRAN AKRAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3241. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/IMRAN AKRAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights