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 § 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 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 10-11 include the trademarks for example “Tolonate TM HDT” or “Desmophen NH 1420". If the trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of the 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. In fact, the value of a trademark would be lost to the extent that it became descriptive of a product, rather than used as an identification of a source or origin of a product. Thus, the use of a trademark or trade name in a claim to identify or describe a material or product would not only render a claim indefinite, but would also constitute an improper use of the trademark or trade name. See MPEP 2173.05(u).
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.
Claims 1-11 and 13-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP-1038987 to Dickenson (Cited on ISR).
As to claims 1-5, 8-11, and 14, Dickenson discloses a polyurea composition comprising an isocyanate A side that includes 10% by weight propylene carbonate, 60% by weight of MDI-PPG2000 quasi-prepolymer, and 30% by weight of MDI uretonimine and a resin B side comprising 48.3% by weight of polyoxypropylene diamine and 44.5% by weight of a multifunctional blocked (hindered) amine derived from cycloaliphatic diamines (0025) and diethyl maleate (0041, 0044, Example 3). The composition is solvent free.
As to claims 6-7, Dickenson discloses an optional polyhydroxy component used in amounts of 1:1 with secondary amino groups are present in the resin B side (0032).
As to claims 13 and 17-18, Dickenson discloses wherein the A-side and B-side are delivered from two separate chambers of a proportioner (kit) and are impacted or impinged upon each other at high velocity to effectuate an intimate mixing of the two components (0038-0040).
As to claim 15, Dickenson discloses a ratio of 1:1 of isocyanate side to resin side (0032, Example 3).
As to claim 16, Dickenson discloses the addition of 0.8% by mass of epoxide silane (Example 3).
As to claims 19-21, Dickenson discloses applying the coatings to any type of substrate including floor substrates such as plastics, woods, or especially concrete (0039).
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP-1038987 to Dickenson (Cited on ISR).
As to claim 12, Dickenson discloses a polyurea composition comprising an isocyanate A side that includes 10% by weight propylene carbonate, 60% by weight of MDI-PPG2000 quasi-prepolymer, and 30% by weight of MDI uretonimine and a resin B side comprising 48.3% by weight of polyoxypropylene diamine and 44.5% by weight of a multifunctional blocked (hindered) amine derived from cycloaliphatic diamines (0025) and diethyl maleate (0041, 0044, Example 3). The composition is solvent free. Dickenson discloses an optional polyhydroxy component used in amounts of 1:1 with secondary amino groups are present in the resin B side (0032). Dickenson discloses any organic polyhydroxyl compounds known from polyurethane chemistry and include both the low molecular weight polyols and the relatively high molecular weight polyols used to prepare the prepolymers may be used (0031), such as 1,6-hexanediol, trimethylolpropane, or polyether polyols (0016).
At the time of filing it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to add the polyhydroxy compounds taught in Dickenson to the resin side of example 3 to prepare polyurethane spray coatings with the desired physical properties (0005).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL L LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-7450. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 7:00-4:00.
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.
/MICHAEL L LEONARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763