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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20210069674 A1 Jung et al. Claim 1 requires “A method for preparing a super absorbent polymer”. Jung et al. discloses “it is an object of the present invention to provide superabsorbent polymer in which rewet and urine leakage are inhibited, and a method for preparing the same” [0009].
Claim 1 further requires “the method comprising steps of: conducting photopolymerization or thermal polymerization of a monomer composition comprising acrylic acid-based monomers having acid groups, at least a part of said acid groups being neutralized, an internal crosslinking agent, and a polymerization initiator to form a hydrogel polymer”. Jung et al. discloses “In the preparation method of superabsorbent polymer of the present invention , the raw material of the super absorbent polymer, namely, the monomer composition comprising acrylic acid-based monomers having acid groups, of which at least a part are neutralized, an internal crosslinking agent, a polymerization initiator, and colloidal silica is polymerized to obtain hydrogel polymer” [0030]. Regarding the type of polymerization Jung et al. discloses “Specifically, as the polymerization initiator, a thermal polymerization initiator or a photopolymerization initiator by UV irradiation may be used according to a polymerization method” [0041].
Claim 1 further requires “mixing the hydrogel polymer with colloidal silica to form a mixture”. Jung et al. discloses the hydrogel polymer is mixed with colloidal silica (see above).
Claim 1 further requires “coarse grinding the mixture to form a coarsely ground hydrogel polymer”. Jung et al. discloses “a coarse grinding step may be further conducted before drying the hydrogel polymer so as to increase drying efficiency” [0072].
Claim 1 further requires “drying, grinding and classifying the coarsely ground hydrogel polymer to form a base resin”. Jung et al. discloses “… polymerized to obtain hydrogel polymer, and dried, ground and sieved to prepare base resin (step 1)” [0030]. Jung et al. does not disclose “classifying”, however they do disclose sieving. It is understood from the instant invention specification that classification may be performed by sieving “The classification process may be conducted according to a common method such as using a standard sieve” [Page 16, Lines 21-22].
Claim 1 further requires “and crosslinking a surface of the base resin in the presence of one of colloidal silica or fumed silica, and a surface crosslinking agent, to form a surface crosslink layer.” Jung et al. discloses “In a common preparation method of superabsorbent polymer, dried and ground polymer, namely, base resin is mixed with a surface crosslinking solution comprising a surface crosslinking agent, and then, the mixture is heated to raise the temperature, thereby conducting a surface crosslinking reaction of the ground polymer” [0083]. It is understood that since the base resin contains colloidal silica the surface crosslinking is done in the presence of colloidal silica.
Claim 2 requires “in the step of mixing the hydrogel polymer with colloidal silica to form a mixture, the colloidal silica is included in a content of 0.01 to 1.0 part by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the hydrogel polymer.”. Jung et al. discloses “the colloidal silica may be added in the concentration of about 0.01 to about 1.0 part by weight, or about 0.02 to about 0.5 parts by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the acrylic acid-based monomers” [0052]. It is understood that because the initiator is a minor component (“The photopolymerization initiator may be included in the concentration of about 0.01 to about 1.0 wt %, based on the monomer composition” [0044]) that 100 parts by weight of the monomer and 100 parts by weight of the polymer are approximately the same (differing by a maximum of 1%).
Claim 3 requires “in the step of crosslinking the surface of the base resin to form a surface crosslink layer, the colloidal silica or fumed silica is included in a content of 0.01 to 1.0 part by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the base resin.”. Jung et al. discloses about 0.01 to 1.0 parts by weight of colloidal silica based on 100 parts by weight of the base resin is in the base resin (see Claim 2) which is included in the surface crosslinking reaction.
Claim 12 requires “the acrylic acid-based monomers are included in a content of about 20 to about 60 wt%, based on the monomer composition.”. Jung et al. discloses “The concentration of the acrylic acid-based monomers may be about 20 to about 60 wt %, preferably about 40 to about 50 wt %, based on the monomer composition” [0039].
Claim 13 requires “the hydrogel polymer formed in the photopolymerization or thermal polymerization has a particle diameter of 2 to 50 mm.”. Jung et al. discloses “commonly, hydrogel polymer with a (weight average) particle diameter of 2 to 50 mm may be obtained.” [0068].
Claim 14 requires “the coarsely ground hydrogel polymer has a particle diameter of 2 to 10 mm.”. Jung et al. discloses “Through the coarse grinding step, the particle diameter of the hydrogel polymer may be controlled to about 2 to about 10 mm” [0074].
Claim 15 requires “the base resin has particles having a particle diameter of 150 µm to 850 µm.”. Jung et al. discloses “The particle diameter of the polymer powder obtained after the grinding step may be 150 um to 850 um.” [0080].
Claim 16 requires “the surface crosslinking agent is included in a content of 0.001 to 5 parts by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the base resin.”. Jung et al. discloses “The content of the surface crosslinking agent added may be appropriately selected according to the kinds of the surface crosslinking agent or reaction conditions, but it may be used in the amount of about 0.001 to about 5 parts by weight, preferably about 0.01 to about 3 parts by weight, more preferably about 0.05 to about 2 parts by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the base resin” [0101].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 4-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 20210069674 A1 Jung et al. Regarding Claims 4-11, Jung et al. discloses all of the limitations of Claim 1. Claims 4-11 all further require that the absorbent polymer made by the method of Claim 1 has certain properties without presenting further limitations to the method steps performed. These properties are understood to be inherent to the polymer made by Claim 1. Indeed, it has been held that where claimed and prior art products are produced by identical or substantially similar methods, a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness has been established. MPEP 2112.01, citing In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (CCPA 1977). In other words, if the prior art teaches or at least suggests the claims' positive method steps, it matters not whether the prior art also teaches or suggests the features of the intended result of performing said steps- it would not be reasonable to expect different results when performing identical or at least substantially similar steps. Accord, MPEP 2145 II, citing, e.g., In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 392 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (stating that “Mere recognition of latent properties in the prior art does not render nonobvious an otherwise known invention”). See also In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (stating the “general rule that merely discovering and claiming a new benefit of an old process cannot render the [old] process again patentable”) (emphasis in original).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA MAXWELL SPEER whose telephone number is (703)756-5471. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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.
/JOSHUA MAXWELL SPEER/
Examiner
Art Unit 1736
/DANIEL BERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736