Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/269,508

Method for Producing Ethylene-Vinyl Alcohol Copolymer Resin Composition

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 23, 2023
Examiner
JOHNSTON, BRIEANN R
Art Unit
1766
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kuraray Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
49%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 49% of resolved cases
49%
Career Allow Rate
491 granted / 1002 resolved
-16.0% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
1063
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
50.4%
+10.4% vs TC avg
§102
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
§112
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1002 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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. 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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawahara (US 6,686,405), optionally in view of Uchiumi (US 8,163,212). Kawahara teaches feeding EVOH into an extruder, where the EVOH before feeding into the extruder can be in the shape of a pellet (col. 11, ll. 4-9), keeping the temperature of the resin in the extruder at 70-170°C, adjusting an amount of water by supplying/removing water into/from the extruder, and discharging the copolymer having a water content right after being discharged of 5-40 wt% col. 10, l. 65 to col. 11, l. 4), where the water content of the EVOH before being fed into the extruder is 0.5-70, preferably 5-60 wt% (col. 11, ll. 11-24). Kawahara teaches adding at least one additive selected from a carboxylic acid, a boron compound, a phosphoric acid compound, an alkali metal salt, and an alkaline earth metal salt in the form of an aqueous solution (col. 11, ll. 57-60). The ranges of water content before and after contact with the extruder overlap with the claimed ranges of 20-60 wt% and 10-35 wt%, respectively, and it has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05. The resin temperature in the extruder overlaps with the claimed range of 70-180°C, and it has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by the reference because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness. Kawahara exemplifies the cylinder of the extruder as having a temperature of 95°C (applicants’ T1) and a rotation degree of 450 rpm; however, does not teach or suggest the temperature of the resin inside of the extruder (applicants’ T0) for this particular example, or a temperature such that applicants’ expression (1) is met. In the instant specification, applicants disclose that the temperature may be adjusted by changing the screw configuration, the cylinder configuration, the temperature of the EVOH pellets to be fed, the cylinder temperature, the number of screw rotations and the like (see instant specification, [0066]), and exemplifies the following: PNG media_image1.png 525 387 media_image1.png Greyscale From the examples, it can be seen that increasing the number of screw rotations to greater than 300 rpm results in a difference in the temperature of the T0 and T1. With a cylinder temperature of 95°C, and a screw rotation of 450 rpm, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the claimed expression, or a difference in T0-T1 to be at least 5, which meets the claimed expression. Kawahara does not specifically teach the temperature of the EVOH pellets when fed into the extruder; however, Kawahara does not teach heating or cooling the pellets. Therefore, adding the pellets at room temperature (about 20-25°C) is prima facie obvious. Alternatively, Kawahara teaches that the EVOH can be supplied to the extruder in the form of pellets, where pellets are formed by extruding a composition, cooling in a water batch, and cutting, where cooling is known to take place around 30°C, as evidenced by Uchiumi (col. 29, ll. 5-8). Therefore, supplying the pellets at a temperature of 30°C is prima facie obvious. Note drying before adding to the extruder is not required. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIEANN R JOHNSTON whose telephone number is (571)270-7344. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM EST. 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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571)272-1302. 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. /Brieann R Johnston/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 23, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 07, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599545
DENTAL ADHESIVE COMPOSITION, DENTAL ADHESIVE MATERIAL, AND DENTAL ADHESIVE MATERIAL PACKAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595385
INKJET INKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577371
OXIDATIVELY CURABLE COATING COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570829
PIPE MADE OF PEROXIDE-CROSSLINKED POLYETHYLENE OF HIGH UV STABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570828
CHARCOAL PRODUCTS MADE WITH PHENOLIC RESIN BINDER AND METHODS FOR MAKING THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
49%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+33.2%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1002 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month