Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/267,164

Non-Ionic Hydrophilized Polyisocyanates Having a Very Low Monomer Content

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 14, 2023
Examiner
LEONARD, MICHAEL L
Art Unit
1763
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Covestro Deutschland AG
OA Round
2 (Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
58%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
839 granted / 1319 resolved
-1.4% vs TC avg
Minimal -6% lift
Without
With
+-6.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
63 currently pending
Career history
1382
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
19.3%
-20.7% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1319 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,914,383 to Richter et al. in view of EP-3428207 to Nakajima et al. As to claims 1-4 and 10-13, Richter discloses a polyisocyanate composition having a residual NCO content of 0.17%, a non-detachable uretonimine content (not found), a uretdione content of 3%, a isocyanurate content of 68% and an iminoxadizaine content of 14% (Experiment 2a). Richter prefers a very low content of phosphorus in the polyisocyanate composition (0.38, 0.19, Examples 8-9) even when phosphorus is part of the reactant or catalyst. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to reduce the levels of phosphorus to those within the claimed amounts in order to improve water dispersibility and surface tension in combination with improved crosslinking and physical properties of the coating (0064-0067). Richter does not expressly teach modifying the isocyanate composition with a non-ionic hydrophilic compound. Nakajima discloses a polyisocyanate composition comprising a polyisocyanate having an aliphatic diisocyanate unit and a non-ionic hydrophilic compound. At the time of filing it would have been obvious to modify the polyisocyanate composition of Richter with the non-ionic compound of Nakajima in order to prepare an isocyanate composition that is excellent in storage stability and is capable of forming a coating with excellent adhesion to a base material (0011). As to claim 5, Richter discloses hexamethylene diisocyanate in the examples. As to claims 6-9, Richter in view of Nakajima disclose 2.0 to 30 mass% of a nonionic hydrophilic polyether containing 5 to 20 ethylene oxide repeat units is reacted with the polyisocyanate. The polyether in Nakajima is the same as used in the instant examples. Accordingly, the pH would be the same. As to claims 14-15, Richter discloses substrates coated with a coating composition containing the polyisocyanate composition (10:40-64). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 17, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 31, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600811
CROSSLINKING AGENT COMPOSITION FOR WATER-COMPATIBLE RESIN, AND WATER-COMPATIBLE RESIN COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12583819
POLYTHIOL COMPOSITION, OPTICAL POLYMERIZABLE COMPOSITION, AND OPTICAL PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583993
RECYCLED POLYOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570789
CURABLE COMPOUND, CURABLE COMPOSITION, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING CURABLE COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565561
HEAT-SHRINKABLE POLYESTER-BASED FILM, HEAT-SHRINKABLE LABEL, AND PACKAGING BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
64%
Grant Probability
58%
With Interview (-6.0%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1319 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month