DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 05/26/2026.
3. Claims 1-18 are pending. Claims 1-8 are under examination on the merits. Claims 1, 4-6 are amended. Claims 9-18 are withdrawn to a non-elected invention from further consideration.
4. The objections and rejections not addressed below are deemed withdrawn.
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 5, recites “other than additives as defined in claim 1, selected from a hydroxy phenyl triazine UV absorber, a compound of formula (C-1-8)”, wherein the improper phrasing of the Markush group renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear which members of the group are part of the claimed invention. Markush groups must be stated in the alternative, of which one acceptable form is “…selected from the group consisting of A, B and C.” See MPEP § 2173.05(h).
8. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Claim 7 recites the limitation "wherein the hydroxyphenyl triazine UV absorber" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of examination against the prior art, claim 7 is construed to recite “The additive mixture according to claim 5, wherein the hydroxyphenyl triazine UV absorber”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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.
10. Claim 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Herbst et al. (EP 1925628 A1, hereinafter “’628”).
Regarding claim 1: ‘628 discloses an additive mixture comprising a compound of formula (1), 0.175% of 1,3,5-tris(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxybenzyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6(1 H,3H,5H)-trione (AO-2), and a compound of formula (2), 0.125% of 1-(2-Hydroxy-2-methyl propoxy)-4-octadecanoyloxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethyl piperidine (HAS-3) in Example 8 (Page 7, [0045],Table 1). The additive mixture is added to an organic material which is susceptible to oxidative, thermal or light-induced degradation (Exxon LL4004). ‘628 discloses the additive mixture further comprises at least one compound other than compounds (1) and (2) selected from a hindered amine light stabilizer (Page 4, [0024]).
PNG
media_image1.png
372
430
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2-3: ‘628 discloses the additive mixture, wherein A1 is 2-hydroxy-2-methylpropyl and A2 is C17 alkyl.
PNG
media_image2.png
140
778
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4: ‘628 discloses the additive mixture, wherein the weight ratio of the compound of formula (1), 0.175% AO-2 to the compound of formula (2), 0.125% HAS-3 is 1.4 which encompasses the range of from 5:95 to 95:5 (0.053 to 19).
Regarding claim 5: ‘628 discloses the additive mixture, further comprising an additive, other than additives as defined in claim 1, selected from a hydroxyphenyl triazine UV absorber (Page 6, [0032]).
Regarding claim 6: ‘628 discloses the additive mixture, wherein the hindered amine light stabilizer is selected from the group as set forth (Page 4, [0027]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. Claims 1-6, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cliff et al. (WO 2021/021871 A1, hereinafter “’871”)
Regarding claim 1: ‘871 teaches stabilizer compositions used in the automotive
industry (Page 1, [0002]) comprising the hindered phenolic antioxidant in the stabilizer additive
composition such as tris(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxybenzyl (CAS No. 27676-62-6) and may have the following chemical structure (Page 15, [0038]) corresponding to the instant compound of formula (1), and 1-(2-hydroxy-2-methylpropoxy)-4-octadecanoyloxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethyl piperidine (Page 23, [0055], Compound (14)) corresponding to the instant compound of formula (2), and at least one compound other than compounds (1) and (2) selected from a hindered amine light stabilizer (Pages 23, [0055] to Page 26, [0056]) with benefit of providing polymer compositions with thermal stability for components of automotive interiors (long term thermal stability), resistance to degradation under UV and visible light exposure (weathering), and resistance to discoloration upon exposure to exhaust fumes originating from other vehicles or during warehouse storage (gas fade).
Thus, the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)
PNG
media_image3.png
312
344
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2-3: ‘871 teaches the stabilizer compositions used in the automotive
industry (Page 1, [0002]), wherein A1 is 2-hydroxy-2-methylpropyl and A2 is C17 alkyl (Page 23, [0055], Compound (14)) corresponding to the instant compound of formula (2),
PNG
media_image2.png
140
778
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4: ‘871 teaches the stabilizer compositions used in the automotive
industry (Page 1, [0002]), wherein the weight ratio of the phenolic antioxidant compound of formula (1) (Page 16, [0041]) to the compound of formula (2) (Page 34, [0062]) encompasses the range of from 5:95 to 95:5 (0.053 to 19)(Page 21, [0051]).
Regarding claim 5: ‘871 teaches the stabilizer compositions used in the automotive
industry (Page 1, [0002]), further comprising an additive, other than additives as defined in claim 1, selected from a hydroxyphenyl triazine UV absorber
Regarding claim 6: ‘871 teaches the stabilizer compositions used in the automotive industry (Page 1, [0002], wherein the hindered amine light stabilizer is selected from the group as set forth (Pages 23, [0055] to Page 26, [0056]).
Regarding claim 8: ‘871 teaches the stabilizer compositions used in the automotive industry (Page 1, [0002]), further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids (Page 37, [0068]).
13. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lederer et al. (WO 2009/092691 A1, hereinafter “’691”) in view of Galbo et al. (US Pub. No. 2002/0058735 A1, hereinafter “’735”).
Regarding claims 1-3: ‘691 teaches stabilizer compositions used in the automotive
industry (Page 1, lines 6-19) comprising (a) at least one phenolic antioxidant (Page 2, lines 3) such as the phenolic antioxidant (A) of formula (V) corresponding to the instant compound of formula (1) (Page 8, lines 1-4), and (b) at least one hindered amine light stabilizer (B) (Page 13, lines 1-9; Page 13, lines 21-24 to Page 16, lines 1-24). ‘691 does not expressly teach the compound of formula (2), wherein A1 is 2-hydroxy-2-methylpropyl and A2 is C16 alkyl.
However, ‘735 teaches hindered amines substituted on the N-atom with an -O-E-OH moiety are particularly effective in stabilizing polyolefin and automotive coating compositions against the deleterious effects of oxidative, thermal and actinic radiation where the presence of the OH group on the compounds adds important properties not attainable by the use of normal -O-E moieties (Page 1, [0002]) such as 1-(2-hydroxy-2-methylpropoxy)-4-hexadecanoyloxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine (Page 28, [0474, Example 44) corresponding to the instant compound of formula (2) with benefit of providing hindered amine compounds which are substituted on the N-atom by N-alkoxy moieties containing one to three hydroxyl groups. These materials are particularly effective in stabilizing polyolefins, especially thermoplastic polyolefins, against the deleterious effects of oxidative, thermal and actinic radiation. The compounds are also effective in stabilizing acid catalyzed and ambient cured coatings systems (Page 1, [0002]).
In an analogous art of composition comprising an organic material which is susceptible to oxidative, thermal or light-induced degradation, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the composition by ‘691, so as to include compound of formula (2), wherein A1 is 2-hydroxy-2-methylpropyl and A2 is C16 alkyl as taught by ‘735, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing hindered amine compounds which are substituted on the N-atom by N-alkoxy moieties containing one to three hydroxyl groups. These materials are particularly effective in stabilizing polyolefins, especially thermoplastic polyolefins, against the deleterious effects of oxidative, thermal and actinic radiation. The compounds are also effective in stabilizing acid catalyzed and ambient cured coatings systems as suggested by ‘735 (Page 1, [0002]).
Regarding claim 4: The disclosure of ‘691 in view of ‘735 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘691 teaches stabilizer compositions used in the automotive industry (Page 1, lines 6-19), wherein the weight ratio of the phenolic antioxidant compound of formula (1) to the compound of formula (2) encompasses the range of from 5:95 to 95:5 (0.053 to 19)(i.e., a ratio sum of the [AO 106 +AO 101+AO 200] to the sum of [UV 200+UV 222]; Page 37, Table 4).
Regarding claim 5: The disclosure of ‘691 in view of ‘735 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. 691 teaches stabilizer compositions used in the automotive industry (Page 1, lines 6-19), ]), further comprising an additive, other than additives as defined in claim 1, selected from a hydroxyphenyl triazine UV absorber (Page 11, lines 4-8).
Regarding claim 6: The disclosure of ‘691 in view of ‘735 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. 691 teaches stabilizer compositions used in the automotive industry (Page 1, lines 6-19), wherein the hindered amine light stabilizer is selected from the group as set forth (Page 13, lines 20-24 to Page 16, lines 1-3).
14. Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herbst et al. (EP 1925628 A1, hereinafter “’628”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Huber et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0359790 A1, hereinafter “’790”).
Regarding claims 7-8: The disclosure of ‘628 is adequately set forth in paragraph 10 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘628 does not expressly teach the hydroxy phenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth, and the composition further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids.
However, ‘790 teaches an article comprising a composition (Page 1, [0001]; Page 14, Claim 13), wherein the composition comprising an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation, and an additive mixture (Page 13, Claim 5) comprises at least one compound of the formula (I) as set forth (Page 1, [0016]), and (B) at least one anti-scratch additive (Page 2, [020]; Page 14, Claim 14), wherein the article is an automotive interior or exterior trim material (Page 13, Claim 1). ‘790 teaches the additive mixture (Page 1, [0001]; Page 14, Claim 13), wherein the hydroxyphenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth (Page 10, [0054], 2.9), and the additive mixture further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids (Page 8, [0054], Section 2.3) with benefit of providing an additive mixture containing a specific sterically hindered amine compound and an anti-scratch additive, a composition containing an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation and the additive mixture, as well as an article made of said composition and the use of the additive mixture for stabilizing an organic material against light, heat or oxidation. The articles made of the composition have a long-term essentially tackiness free surface with no or reduced blooming (Page 1, [0001]).
In an analogous art of composition comprising an organic material which is susceptible to oxidative, thermal or light-induced degradation, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the composition by ‘628, so as to include the hydroxy phenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth, and the composition further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids as taught by ‘790, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing an additive mixture containing a specific sterically hindered amine compound and an anti-scratch additive, a composition containing an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation and the additive mixture, as well as an article made of said composition and the use of the additive mixture for stabilizing an organic material against light, heat or oxidation. The articles made of the composition have a long-term essentially tackiness free surface with no or reduced blooming as suggested by ‘790 (Page 1, [0001]).
15. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cliff et al. (WO 2021/021871 A1, hereinafter “’871”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Huber et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0359790 A1, hereinafter “’790”).
Regarding claim 7: The disclosure of ‘871 is adequately set forth in paragraph 12 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘871 does not expressly teach the hydroxy phenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth.
However, ‘790 teaches an article comprising a composition (Page 1, [0001]; Page 14, Claim 13), wherein the composition comprising an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation, and an additive mixture (Page 13, Claim 5) comprises at least one compound of the formula (I) as set forth (Page 1, [0016]), and (B) at least one anti-scratch additive (Page 2, [020]; Page 14, Claim 14), wherein the article is an automotive interior or exterior trim material (Page 13, Claim 1). ‘790 teaches the additive mixture (Page 1, [0001]; Page 14, Claim 13), wherein the hydroxyphenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth (Page 10, [0054], 2.9), and the additive mixture further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids (Page 8, [0054], Section 2.3) with benefit of providing an additive mixture containing a specific sterically hindered amine compound and an anti-scratch additive, a composition containing an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation and the additive mixture, as well as an article made of said composition and the use of the additive mixture for stabilizing an organic material against light, heat or oxidation. The articles made of the composition have a long-term essentially tackiness free surface with no or reduced blooming (Page 1, [0001]).
In an analogous art of composition comprising an organic material which is susceptible to oxidative, thermal or light-induced degradation, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the composition by ‘871, so as to include the hydroxy phenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth, and the composition further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids as taught by ‘790, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing an additive mixture containing a specific sterically hindered amine compound and an anti-scratch additive, a composition containing an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation and the additive mixture, as well as an article made of said composition and the use of the additive mixture for stabilizing an organic material against light, heat or oxidation. The articles made of the composition have a long-term essentially tackiness free surface with no or reduced blooming as suggested by ‘790 (Page 1, [0001]).
16. Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lederer et al. (WO 2009/092691 A1, hereinafter “’691”) in view of Galbo et al. (US Pub. No. 2002/0058735 A1, hereinafter “’735”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Huber et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0359790 A1, hereinafter “’790”).
Regarding claims 7-8: The disclosure of ‘691 in view of ‘735 is adequately set forth in paragraph 13 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘691 in view of ‘735 does not expressly teach the hydroxy phenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth, and the composition further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids.
However, ‘790 teaches an article comprising a composition (Page 1, [0001]; Page 14, Claim 13), wherein the composition comprising an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation, and an additive mixture (Page 13, Claim 5) comprises at least one compound of the formula (I) as set forth (Page 1, [0016]), and (B) at least one anti-scratch additive (Page 2, [020]; Page 14, Claim 14), wherein the article is an automotive interior or exterior trim material (Page 13, Claim 1). ‘790 teaches the additive mixture (Page 1, [0001]; Page 14, Claim 13), wherein the hydroxyphenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth (Page 10, [0054], 2.9), and the additive mixture further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids (Page 8, [0054], Section 2.3) with benefit of providing an additive mixture containing a specific sterically hindered amine compound and an anti-scratch additive, a composition containing an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation and the additive mixture, as well as an article made of said composition and the use of the additive mixture for stabilizing an organic material against light, heat or oxidation. The articles made of the composition have a long-term essentially tackiness free surface with no or reduced blooming (Page 1, [0001]).
In an analogous art of composition comprising an organic material which is susceptible to oxidative, thermal or light-induced degradation, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the composition by ‘691, so as to include the hydroxy phenyl triazine UV absorber is selected from the group as set forth, and the composition further comprising esters of substituted and unsubstituted benzoic acids as taught by ‘790, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing an additive mixture containing a specific sterically hindered amine compound and an anti-scratch additive, a composition containing an organic material susceptible to degradation induced by light, heat or oxidation and the additive mixture, as well as an article made of said composition and the use of the additive mixture for stabilizing an organic material against light, heat or oxidation. The articles made of the composition have a long-term essentially tackiness free surface with no or reduced blooming as suggested by ‘790 (Page 1, [0001]).
Response to Arguments
17. Applicant's arguments filed 05/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive
In response to Applicant’s argument that Herbst discloses only a single sterically hindered amine and a single phenolic antioxidant, and fails to recite at least one compound other than compounds (1) and (2) selected from a hindered amine light stabilizer.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. ‘628 discloses an additive mixture comprising a compound of formula (1), 0.175% of 1,3,5-tris(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxybenzyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6(1 H,3H,5H)-trione (AO-2), and a compound of formula (2), 0.125% of 1-(2-Hydroxy-2-methyl propoxy)-4-octadecanoyloxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethyl piperidine (HAS-3) in working Example 8 (Page 7, [0045],Table 1). The additive mixture is added to an organic material which is susceptible to oxidative, thermal or light-induced degradation (Exxon LL4004). ‘628 discloses the additive mixture further comprises at least one compound other than compounds (1) and (2) selected from a hindered amine light stabilizer (Page 4, [0024]). Thus, the anticipatory rejection by ‘628 is maintained
18. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Examiner Information
19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bijan Ahvazi, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571) 270-3449. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9.00 A.M. -7 P.M..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Bijan Ahvazi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
06/17/2026
bijan.ahvazi@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights