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.
Status of Application
Claims 1-17 are pending and presented for examination. Claims 1-10 were elected without traverse in the response dated 26 May 2026. As such claims 11-17 are withdrawn by the Examiner as they are non-elected. Claim 2 is also WITHDRAWN as it does not read upon the elected species as 1:10-1:20 is less than 1:5 and the elected species requires greater than 1:5. Applicants elected, without traverse, Species II, which corresponds to claims 1-10. As such, THIS RESTRICTION REQUIREMENT IS MADE FINAL.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant's request for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(a)-(d). Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
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, 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Preparation of Ultrahigh Molecular Weight Polyethylene/Graphene Nanocomposite In situ Polymerization via Spherical and Sandwich Structure Graphene/SiO2 Support” to Su et al. (hereinafter, “Su at __”; cited and provided by Applicants) in view of “Effects of GO oxidation degree on GO/BuMgCl supported Ti-based Ziegler–Natta catalyst performance and nanocomposite properties” to Zhang et al. (hereinafter, “Zhang at __”).
Regarding claim 1, Su discloses a graphene oxide/silica supported Ziegler-Natta catalyst (Su at “Abstract”; BuMgCl, 2 R col) having a GO/SIO2 ratio of 1:5 (Su at “Fig. 6a”).
However, Su does not expressly state that the molar ratio of oxygen in the GO is at least 25 mol%.
Zhang also in a GO support for Z-N (Zhang at “Abstract” discloses molar ratios of GO-1 at 69%, GO-2 at 52% and GO-3 at 19%.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to utilize the O mol% of Zhang in the GO of Su. The teaching or suggested motivation in doing so being higher modulus and elongation break % (Zhang at “Table 5”).
As to claim 3, 52 mol% is considered to be prima facie obvious over 25-50 mol% as a value which lie closed to a claimed value has been considered to be prima facie obvious (see MPEP 2144.05). Though it is also noted that Zhang supplies specificity for a range of 19-52 mol% given their disclosed values and this also is prima facie obvious as the range overlaps (Id.).
Turning to claim 10, the GO is prepared via Hummers method so it is exfoliated (Zhang at 20735 R col).
Claims 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su and Zhang as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of US PG Pub No. 20160355615 to Zuidweld et al. (hereinafter, “Zuidweld at __”).
Turning to claims 4-9, Su discloses BuMg is present, as is Ti (Su at 5 R col, as TiCl4 per 8 L col) and TMA. But does not expressly state an electron donor or halogen.
Zuidweld in a Z-N catalyst of MgCl2/TiCl4 discloses addition of an electron donor containing esters, ethers, trimethyl aluminum, etc., and AlCl3 (Zuidweld at [0052], [0173] & [0229]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to add the ED and halide of Zuidweld to the composition of Su and Zhang. The teaching or suggested motivation in doing so being the ability to obtain high isotacticity PP and high hydrogen and ethylene conversion (Zuidweld at [0043]-[0044]).
Conclusion
Claims 1-10 are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD M RUMP whose telephone number is (571)270-5848. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 06:45 AM to 04:45 PM.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
RICHARD M. RUMP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1759
/RICHARD M RUMP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights