Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/275,109

POLYCARBONATE RESIN COMPOSITION AND MOLDED ARTICLE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 31, 2023
Examiner
DONAHUE, OLGA LUCIA
Art Unit
1763
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Teijin Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
78 granted / 104 resolved
+10.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
142
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
56.1%
+16.1% vs TC avg
§102
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
§112
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 104 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 . This communication responds to the application and amended claim set filed July 31, 2023. Claims 1-4 are currently pending Priority This application is the national stage entry of PCT/JP2021/046005, filed December 14,2021, which claims priority to JP2021-014983, filed February 2,2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1, line 10, “represented by the following general formula [1]” is suggested to be replaced to “ represented by general formula [1]” in order to ensure consistency. In claim 1, line 11, “represented by the following general formula [3]” is suggested to be replaced to “ represented by general formula [3]” in order to ensure consistency. In claim 1, line 24, “represented by the following general formula [2]” is suggested to be replaced to “ represented by general formula [2]” in order to ensure consistency. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashida (WO 2014/148641 as listed on the IDS dated 7/31/2023 and/or US PG Pub 2016/0024301 A1, wherein US PG Pub 2016/0024301 A1 is being used as English Translation herewith). Regarding claim 1, Hayashida teaches a polycarbonate resin composition comprising, relative to 100 parts by weight of a resin component consisting of a polycarbonate- polydiorganosiloxane copolymer (PC-PDMS copolymer, which correspond to component A) and an aromatic polycarbonate resin (PC resin, which correspond to component B), 5 to 45 parts by weight of phosphorus-based flame retardant including a phosphazene compound (claim 5, [0218]) and 0.01 to 3 parts by weight of a fluorine-containing anti-dripping agent (claim 1), wherein the examples disclose a content of 10-70 parts by weight of the PC-PDMS and 30-90 parts by weight of the PC (Table 1); wherein the viscosity average molecular weight (Mv) of the PC-PDMS copolymer (component A) is 11,000 to 30,000 [0119] and the viscosity average molecular weight (Mv) of the PC resin (component B) is 11,000 to 30,000 [0173], which implies a ratio of the Mv of component A to the Mv of component B of 0.36 to 2.7. Hayashida further teaches a PC-PDMS copolymer resin composed of a polycarbonate block derived from a dihydric phenol represented by the formula (1) and a polydiorganosiloxane block derived from a dihydric phenol represented by formula (3) (claim 4). It is noted that interfacial polymerization of the dihydric phenol of formula (1) and the hydroxyaryl-terminated polydioorganosiloxane of formula (3) with a carbonate ester results in the formation of carbonate linkages (-O-CO-O), which form a copolymer comprising carbonate-containing repeating units that are derived from formulas (1) and (3), that are represented by the claimed formulas [1] and [3], as recited in the instant claim. Furthermore, Hayashida teaches the diorganosiloxane polymerization degree (p+q) is more preferably 30-60 [0087], as required by the instant claim. PNG media_image1.png 322 422 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 428 434 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 198 412 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 498 440 media_image4.png Greyscale Hayashida and the claims differ in that Hayashida does not teach the claimed ranges for the phosphazene compound, fluorine-containing anti-dripping agent, Mv of component A and the ratio Mv component A/Mv component B as recited in the instant claims. However, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have considered the invention to have been obvious because the ranges taught by Hayashida overlap the instantly claimed ranges and therefore are considered to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select any portion of the disclosed ranges including the instantly claimed ranges from the ranges disclosed in the prior art reference, MPEP 2144.05. Regarding claim 2, Hayashida teaches the polycarbonate-polydiorganosiloxane copolymer has an aggregate structure with polydiorganosiloxane domains dispersed in a polycarbonate matrix ([0101]-[0102], [0123]) wherein the average size of polyodiorganosiloxane domains is preferably 5 to 25 nm [0120] and a normalized dispersity of no more than 30% [0120]. Hayashida further teaches the total light transmittance is 88% or more [0127], as required by the instant claim. Regarding claim 3, Hayashida teaches that any phosphazene compound is acceptable if it is a compound containing no halogen atom and having a phosphazene structure in the molecule represented by the formula —P(R2)=N—, wherein R2 is an organic group. The phosphazene compound is represented by the following formulas (7) (which correspond to a cyclic phosphazene), wherein n is an integer of 3-10, thereby reading on X1, X2, X3 and X4 are each a hydrogen atom, hydroxyl group, amino group or organic group containing no halogen atom, n is an integer of 3 (which correspond to the phosphazene cyclic structure of 100 mol%) and examples of the organic group are include alkoxy group, phenyl group, amino group and allyl group. PNG media_image5.png 220 414 media_image5.png Greyscale Regarding claim 4, Hayashida teaches a molded articles obtained by molding the resin composition ([0013], (claim 13)). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLGA L. DONAHUE whose telephone number is (571)270-1152. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00. 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. /OLGA LUCIA DONAHUE/Examiner, Art Unit 1763 /CATHERINE S BRANCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 31, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584019
SPORTS FIELD WITH SHOCK PAD COMPRISING LIGNIN-BASED BINDER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577389
THERMOPLASTIC MOULDING MATERIALS WITH IMPROVED PROPERTY PROFILE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577379
NBR COMPOSITION AND BUFFER MATERIAL USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570840
FLAME-RETARDANT RESIN COMPOSITION, FLAME-RETARDANT RESIN HOUSING, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12553235
METHOD OF REDUCING THE FORMALDEHYDE EMISSION OF A MINERAL FIBER PRODUCT, AND MINERAL FIBER PRODUCT WITH REDUCED FORMALDEHYDE EMISSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
75%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+11.9%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 104 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