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 .
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:
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 6-10, 13, 16-19, 21, 23, 93-96, and 99 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2020/0140680 to Lewis et al. in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2021/0102076 to Konuma et al. and U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2005/0196629 to Bariatinsky et al.
As to claims 1, 3, and 99, Lewis discloses coated substrates coated with a coating composition comprising a polymeric binder comprising reactive functional groups and a curing agent comprising functional groups that are reactive with the reactive functional groups including aminoplasts, polyisocyanates, polyepoxides, hydroxalkylamides, polyacids, polyamines, polyamides which are reactive with carboxylic acids (0053-0075 also function as crosslinking agents). Lewis discloses wherein the substrate is treated with a pretreatment composition including those comprising trivalent chromium (0146).
Lewis discloses pretreated substrates obtained from a pretreatment composition comprising a trivalent chromium as well as other types of pretreatment compositions.
Konuma discloses pretreatment compositions comprising trivalent chromium (0015, 0092-0095).
At the time of filing it would have been obvious to select the trivalent chromium pretreatment composition taught in Lewis to provide improved corrosion resistance as taught in Konuma (0002).
Lewis teaches suitable substrates including metals and aluminums. The reference does not specifically teach beverage cans.
However, Bariatinsky teaches coatings compositions designed to coat beverage cans (Abstract). The coating compositions include a polyester acrylate and a second collection of components including ethylenically unsatured mono- or multi-functional acids, and crosslinking agents (0015, 0089-0090). The coating compositions taught in Lewis and Bariatinky overlap in scope in terms of containing polymeric binders and groups capable of crosslinking with the reactive groups of the polymeric binders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to use the coating compositions designed for metals and aluminum as taught in Lewis to coat beverage cans as taught in Bariatinki because it is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose (metal and aluminum coatings), in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose...(beverage can made from metal or aluminum).
As to claims 6-7, Lewis discloses the curable film forming compositions may be solventborne or water (Abstract, 0093, 0149).
As to claims 8-10, 13, 16-18, and 23, Lewis discloses wherein the coating composition comprises a polyester resin derived from the reaction of polyhydric alcohols including ethylene glycol, hexylene glycol, or neopentyl glycol and polyacids such as sebacic, maleic or fumaric, and phthalic including anhydrides thereof, i.e. acrylic polyester resin (0035).
As to claim 19, Lewis discloses suitable acrylic monomers such as methacrylic acid, ethyl methacrylate, butyl methacrylate, etc. (0027, 0031).
As to claim 21, Lewis discloses wherein the amount of polymer binder in the composition ranges from 30 to 60% (0092).
As to claims 93-96 with regard to the claimed properties, the Office realizes that all of the claimed effects or physical properties are not positively stated by the reference. However, the reference teaches all of the claimed ingredients within the claimed amounts.
Therefore, the claimed effects and physical properties would implicitly be achieved by a composite with all the claimed ingredients. If it is the applicants' position that this would not be the case: (1) evidence would need to be provided to support the applicants' position; and (2) it would the Office's position that the application contains inadequate disclosure that there is no teaching as to how to obtain the claimed properties with only the claimed ingredients.
As to claim 101, Lewis discloses multiple substrates (0134-0140).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MICHAEL L LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-7450. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 7:00-4:00.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 571-272-1130. 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.
/MICHAEL L LEONARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights