Office Action Predictor
Application No. 18/272,203

PROTECTIVE COLLOID WITH EFFECTIVE PROTECTION OF ATTACHMENT AND METHOD FOR USING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jul 13, 2023
Examiner
COPENHEAVER, BLAINE R
Art Unit
1781
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Luxcase Precision Technology (Yancheng) Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

82%
Career Allow Rate
28 granted / 34 resolved
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
avg trend
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
48 pending
82
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
43.6%
+3.6% vs TC avg
§102
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
§112
22.9%
-17.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Response to Amendment The preliminary amendment filed on July 13, 2023 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claim Objections Claims 8 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 8, line 1, the term “Protective” should be changed to -- The protective --. In claim 10, line 3, the term “4-(Phenylthio)” should be change to -- 4-(phenylthiol) --. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. In claim 1, line 1, the terms “A protective colloid, raw materials constituting the protective colloid” is indefinite in that it is unclear if a colloid is being claimed or the raw materials that form the colloid is being claimed. For purposes of this Office Action, claims 1-10 are being interpreted as being a protective colloid formed from the raw materials set forth in claims 1. That is, claim 1 is being interpreted as though it readds as “A protective colloid formed from raw materials Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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, 5-6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 110669465 in view of CN 105219339. Machine translations of CN ‘465 (claims) and CN ‘339 (disclosure) are attached to this Office action. Regarding claim 1, CN ‘465 discloses a viscous adhesive glue, i.e., colloid, that comprises 1-30 wt% of an epoxy-modified acrylate (claims 1 and 4); 2-10 wt% of heat expansion microspheres (claim 1), 20-50 wt% of an active acrylic monomer (claim 1), and 0.5-2 wt% of a photoinitator (claim 1). CN ‘465 does not disclose the use of (a) a plasticizer, (b) a cationic photoinitator, or (c) the specifically claimed amounts of the epoxy-modified acrylate. With respect to (a), CN ‘339 discloses a UV curing liquid glue that includes a plasticizer in an amount within the claimed range (line 43). With respect to (b), CN ‘339 discloses the use of a cationic photoinitator (line 89). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have prepared the colloid of CN ‘465, wherein a plasticizer is included within the presently claimed amount and a cationic photoinitator is used, as taught in CN ‘339, motivated by the desire to obtain a colloid having desire viscosity and curing properties. With respect to (c), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used an epoxy-modified acrylate within the presently claimed amount, since, as set forth in MPEP 2144.05, when the general conditions of a claim are disclosed, discovering workable ranges by routine experimentation is not inventive. Regarding claim 2, CN ‘465 discloses that the heat-expandable microspheres will expand at 110ᵒC [0007] and viscous glue is mixed well which infers homogenous distribution of the particles and microspheres in the viscous adhesive glue [0026]. Regarding claim 5, CN ‘465 discloses magnetic particles present in an amount of 2-4 wt% (claim 1). Regarding claim 6, CN ‘465 discloses that the magnetic particles are iron carbide (claim 1). Regarding claim 10, CN ‘339 discloses that the cationic photoinitator can be diphenyliodonium hexafluorophosphate (lines 94-95). Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 110669465 in view of CN 105219339 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Niwa et al. (US Pub 2013/0199732). CN ‘465 as modified by CN ‘339 does not disclose the use of heat-expandable particles comprising an outer shell and a physical foaming agent inside the outer shell. Niwa discloses an adhesive composition that comprises heat-expandable particles comprising an outer shell [0116] having a physical foaming agent inside the outer shell [0119]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have prepared the colloid of CN ‘465 as modified by CN ‘339, wherein the heat-expandable particles comprises an outer shell having a physical blowing agent contained therein motivated by the desire to effectively control the volume expansion of the heat-expandable particles, as taught by Niwa. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11-20 are allowed. Claims 7-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claims 7 and 8, none of the prior art of record disclose or suggests the claimed protective colloid that further comprises a fluorescent agent present in an amount between 0.1-0.5wt%. With respect to claim 9, none of the prior art of record disclose or suggests, the claimed protective colloid wherein the plasticizer and active monomer are selected for the materials set forth in claim 9. With respect to claims 11-20, none of the prior art of record disclose or suggests the claimed method of using the claimed protective colloid comprising the claimed steps S1, S2, S3, and S4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Blaine Copenheaver whose telephone number is (571)272-1156. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5. 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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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. /BLAINE COPENHEAVER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 13, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 20, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12595375
POLYSILOXANE-BASED COATING COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594745
ELASTOMER LAMINATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589579
LASER ENGRAVABLE LABELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584226
ELECTRICAL STEEL SHEET WITH INSULATING COATING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570790
BIODEGRADABLE POLYESTER SOLUTION AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate 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
82%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+14.3%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 34 resolved cases by this examiner