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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 12 are objected to because of the following reasons:
With respect to claim 9, line 3, “Stockes” should be replaced with “Stokes”.
With respect to claim 12, capital letters starting lines 3 and 4 are improper given that a claim is a single sentence.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 4 extends the lower limit of the amount of heterophasic propylene from 62.3 wt % (from claim 1) to 17.3 wt %. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 of this title, 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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brandstetter (US 9,115,276) in view of Seitl (EP 1 477 525).
With respect to claims 1-4, 6, 7, 10, and 11, Brandstetter discloses a polyolefin composition for use in automotive parts (col. 7, lines 32-36) having low CLTE (coefficient of thermal expansion) comprising 54-70 wt % heterophasic propylene copolymer and 2-10 wt % an ethylene/C4-C10 alpha-olefin elastomer (col. 15, lines 1-21). Example 3 includes 71.9 wt % of heterophasic propylene copolymer and 4 wt % elastomer (Table 1). Brandstetter teaches that the melt flow rate (same as melt flow index) of the polymer composition is 5.0-50 g/10 min (230°C, 2.16 kg) (col. 4, lines 15-17) and that the melt flow rate of the heterophasic propylene copolymer is 5-70 g/10 min (col. 2, lines 15-21). Also, the heterophasic propylene copolymer has xylene soluble content of 10-35 wt %, wherein the xylene soluble part of the heterophasic propylene copolymer has intrinsic viscosity of 1.5-3.5 dl/g (col. 15, lines 51-54). The ethylene/C4-C10 alpha-olefin elastomer is preferably 1-butene that reads on claimed 1-butene-ethylene copolymer (col. 3, lines 40-46).
Brandstetter fails to exemplify or disclose with sufficient specificity an intrinsic viscosity of the xylene soluble part of the heterophasic propylene copolymer of 1.53-1.89 dl/g.
Seitl discloses a polyolefin composition comprising 90-99 wt % heterophasic propylene copolymer and a 1-10 wt % of inorganic filler (paragraph 0008) for use in automotive parts (like Brandstetter). Seitl teaches that the intrinsic viscosity of the xylene soluble portion of the heterophasic copolymer is 1.8 dl/g or less because lower values have lower molecular weight and therefore reduce CLTE (paragraphs 0010-0012).
Given that both Brandstetter and Seitl are drawn to compositions for use in automotive parts having low CTFE comprising heterophasic propylene copolymer and further given that Seitl teaches that having the intrinsic viscosity of the xylene soluble part of the heterophasic propylene copolymer of 1.8 dl/g and less reduces CLTE, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize intrinsic viscosities within the lower range taught by Brandstetter to aid in obtaining low CTFE properties.
With respect to claim 5, 8, and 9, Brandstetter discloses that its composition contains 20-46 wt % of an inorganic filler such as talc having D50 of 1.0-15 µm (col. 15, lines 13 and 21-27). Brandstetter teaches that amounts of inorganic filler less than 20 wt % results in a high CLTE (coefficient of linear thermal expansion) (col. 3, lines 1-5).
The amount of 20-46 wt % is outside the claimed range of at most 10 wt %.
However, case law holds that the omission of an element and its function is obvious if the function of the element is not desired. Ex parte Wu, 10 USPQ 2031 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1989).
Support for this omission or reduction is found in Seitl which discloses a polyolefin composition comprising 90-99 wt % heterophasic propylene copolymer and 1-10 wt % of inorganic filler (paragraph 0008) for use in automotive parts (like Brandstetter). Seitl explains that inorganic filler such as talc aids in lowering CLTE but also undesirably increases the density (paragraph 0004-0005). Lower density is desired in automotive parts to reduce fuel consumption (paragraph 0005). To this end, Seitl teaches that the intrinsic viscosity of the xylene soluble portion of the heterophasic copolymer is 1.8 dl/g or less because lower values have lower molecular weight and therefore reduce CLTE (paragraphs 0010-0012). By reducing the intrinsic viscosity, a lower amount of inorganic filler can be used to reduce CTFE.
Given that both Brandstetter and Seitl are drawn to compositions for use in automotive parts having low CTFE comprising heterophasic propylene copolymer and inorganic filler and further given that Seitl teaches that the intrinsic viscosity of the xylene soluble part of the heterophasic propylene copolymer of 1.8 dl/g and less reduces CLTE, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to desirably reduce the density of the automotive parts by reducing Brandstetter’s amount of inorganic filler to within the claimed range while also maintaining low CTFE properties.
With respect to claim 6, Brandstetter teaches that the ethylene/C4-C10 alpha-olefin elastomer has melt flow rate of 0.3-100 g/10 min at 190°C, 216 kg) (col. 15, lines 31-33).
With respect to claim 7, Brandstetter teaches that the density of the ethylene/C4-C10 alpha-olefin elastomer of 860-915 kg/m3, i.e., 0.860-0.915 g/cm3 (col. 3, lines 53-58).
With respect to claim 10, Brandstetter does not disclose the Shore A hardness of the ethylene/C4-C10 alpha-olefin elastomer, however, it discloses a density of the ethylene/C4-C10 alpha-olefin elastomer that substantially overlaps with the claimed range. Because both density and Shore A hardness are related to a material’s composition and structure, the Shore A hardness would be expected to overlap with the claimed range.
With respect to claims 12-15, Brandstetter teaches that the composition is shaped by molding and forming into molded articles and larger parts for exterior applications in the automotive industry (col. 7, lines 31-37).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICKEY NERANGIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2701. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:00 pm EST, Monday - Friday.
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.
/Vickey Nerangis/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
vn