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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-10, 13-15 and 19-24 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected composition and methods of filament forming and printing, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 11/12/2025.
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 11/12/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the composition of claims 1, 9, 13 and 19 were amended in the preliminary amendment dated February 1, 2024 after the written opinion was mailed on November 4, 2022 as such the comments of the written opinion were not directed to the exact contents of the pending claims of the present application. This is not found persuasive because the composition of claim 1 which is also claimed in independent claims 9, 12 and 19 is found in the prior art cited on the International Search Report and Written opinion corresponding to PCT/IB2022/057632 and therefore the invention does not provide an contribution over the prior art. Specifically, reference US20150175859 teaches the claimed composition of reacting an organic polyisocyanate containing a uretdione group with reaction hydrogen atoms wherein the average functionality of the reactants and the proportions thereof are chosen to provide a ratio of reactive hydrogen groups to NCO groups between 0.5 to 2.0:1 which overlaps the claimed range [0033]. The composition of does not provide a contribution over the prior art.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greszta-Franz et al (US 20150175859).
Greszta-Franz is directed to adhesive formulations (Title). The present invention relates to adhesive formulations based on uretdione-group-comprising polyaddition compounds that are free of isocyanate groups and monomeric polyisocyanates, and to the use thereof for the production of adhesive bonds between substrates, in particular for the production of flexible film composites (ABST).
Greszta-Franz teaches the uretdione group comprising polyaddition compound A) that are diisocyantes having aliphatically, cycloaliphatically, araliphatically and/or aromatically bonded isocyanate groups [0021], [0022]. The uretdione group carrying polyisocyantes to uretdione group comprising polyaddition compound A) involves reaction of free isocyanate groups with hydroxyl group comprising monomers or polymers [0023]
The production of the adhesive formulations used according to the invention the reaction of the uretdione-group-comprising polyaddition compound A) with the polyol or with the polyol formulation B) is carried out while maintaining an equivalent ratio of uretdione groups to hydroxyl groups of from 0.5:1 to 2.0:1, preferably from 0.7:1 to 1.3:1, particularly preferably from 0.8:1 to 1:1. Any residual contents of free isocyanate groups still present in the uretdione-group-comprising polyaddition compound are not taken into consideration when setting the equivalent ratio [0033].
Greszta-Franz does not explicitly teach the article is extrudable, however Greszta-Franz teaches the adhesive is used in laminated form with films which would inherently be extruded articles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to produce an extrudable article with a ratio of isocyanate to hydroxyl group of greater than 1.2:1 motivated to produce an adhesive that bonds laminated films.
Claims 1, 2, 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Rehbold et al (US 5565270) as evidenced by Panse (US20050112971).
Rehbold is directed to a process for the solventless production of elastic filaments based on segmented poly(urethane)s or poly(urethane urea)s having improved thermal properties and, hence, improved processing behavior, for example during the heat setting of fabrics containing the elastic fibers, by the use of a polyisocyanate containing isocyanurate groups in the reaction of long-chain, relatively high molecular weight polyhydroxyl compounds with organic diisocyanates and low molecular weight diols and, optionally, other auxiliaries and additives in the melt, direct spinning of the reaction mixture thus obtained and thermal aftertreatment of the elastic filaments obtained and also to the filaments obtainable by this process (ABST).
Rehbold teaches i) a prepolymer is prepared discontinuously or continuously, preferably in several steps, from at least parts of component (a) and at least parts of components (b) and (c), the ratio of the sum of isocyanate equivalents of components (b) and (c) to the number of hydroxyl equivalents of component (a) in the prepolymer being 1.05:1 to 10:1, preferably 1.1:1 to 6:1 and more preferably 1.5:1 to 4:1 and (col. 7, lines 15-22).
Rehbold teaches a polyurethane fiber that has a ratio of isocyanate groups to equivalent hydroxyl groups that overlaps the claimed range of greater than 1.2:1.
Rehbold teaches component b) can be any one of aromatic diisocyanates such as 2,4-toluene diisocyanate and corresponding isomer mixtures of 2,4/2,6-diisocyanate. In a particularly preferred embodiment, pure 4,4'-diphenyl methane diisocyanate is used. Mixtures of aromatic diisocyanates may of course be used. Suitable mixture components or individual components are, for example, the following (cyclo)aliphatic diisocyanates, more particularly 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate, 1,8-octamethylene diisocyanate, 2,3-methyl-1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate or 2,4-diisocyanato-1-methyl cyclohexane and the 4,4'-dicyclohexyl alkylidene, 4,4'-dicyclohexyl ether diisocyanates in their various stereoisomers or stereoisomer mixtures (col. 4, lines 46-67).
Rehbold teaches component c) may consist of aromatic or cycloaliphatic diisocyanates mentioned in the description of component b) (col. 5, lines 3-23).
The cycloaliphatic diisocyanates, e.g. 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate, 2,3-methyl-1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate are considered uretdione diisocyanates as evidenced by Pause [0006], wherein TDI, MDI, XDI, HMDI are all considered uretdione diisocyanates. As the groups are the same as cited in Applicant’s specification the groups of Rehold are equated with latent (or blocked) uretdiones. Applicant teaches the uretdione groups are hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI) [0070].
As the composition is spun into a filament, the composition is extrudable material and an extrudable article.
Rehbold teaches the ratio of the sum of isocyanate equivalents of components (b) and (c) to the number of hydroxyl equivalents of component (a) in the prepolymer being 1.05:1 to 10:1, preferably 1.1:1 to 6:1 and more preferably 1.5:1 to 4:1 and (col. 7, lines 15-22). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
As to claim 2, Rehbold teaches the composition is produced into a fiber (ABST).
As to claim 5, Rehbold teaches uretdione reaction products of diisocyanate that are reacted together that are b) and c) (col. 4, lines 1-13). Rehbold teaches hydroxyl containing compounds a) and d) that are diols, such as polyester diols and macrodiols (col. 4, lines 16-40). Rehbold teaches isocyanate compounds such as b) and c) diisocyanates react together (col. 6, lines 54-60).
As to claim 6, Rehbold teaches use of diols and macrodiols having molecular weights of 1000 to 8000 as component a) and include polyester diols (col. 3, lines 57-65 and col. 4, lines 16-40). Polyester diols are equated with the polyester polyol. Polyester diols are a subset of polyester polyols that have exactly 2 hydroxyl groups.
As to claim 7, Rehbold teaches using poly(hexanediol-co-neopentyl glycol adipate)diol which is equated with a polyester adipate.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Rehbold et al (US 5565270) as evidenced by Panse (US20050112971) in further view of Boscolo et al (US 20090264038).
As to claim 3, Rehbold teaches an elastic filament but does not teach a sheath of ethylene copolymer or a polyolefin.
Boscolo is directed to an elastic spunbond nonwoven and composite nonwoven comprising same (Title). Boscolo teaches the multi-component filaments that are sheath/core type comprising a first component that is a thermoplastic polyurethane and the second polymer component is an elastic propylene-based olefin copolymer (ABST). The polyurethanes are used in the core [0022]. The multi-filament comprises a core and an outer sheath and the outer sheath comprises the second polymer component [0037].
Boscolo teaches that elastic nonwovens are desired and TPU can produce an elastic web, however the TPU can provide a sticky nature and have poor bonding ability and therefore proposed to produce multicomponent filaments including a first elastic component and second extensible component wherein the second extensible component is a polyolefin [0004]-[0009]. Boscolo teaches the present invention provides use of TPU with the sheath of polyolefin and achieves high elastic properties.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide a sheath of polyolefin over the elastic polyurethane core motivated to overcome problems with sticky feel and lack of bonding of the polyurethane.
As to claim 4, Rehbold differs and does not teach an outer sheath on the polyurethane fiber.
Boscolo teaches an outer sheath of polyolefin and teaches the first and second polymer components can also include other materials like flow promoters or special additives to enhance processability of the composition, e.g. slip agents and are particularly added to the second polymer component [0074]. An slip agent is equated with an antiblock agent.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ an antiblock agent in the outer composition motivated improve the processibility of the multicomponent filament.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Rehbold et al (US 5565270) as evidenced by Panse (US20050112971) in further view of Matsui et al (JP 2004323855).
As to claim 8, Rehbold does not teach packaging the elastic polyurethane filament in a hermetically sealed package.
Matsui teaches an elastic resin, elastic resin molding, clothing and auxiliary material for clothing (Title). Matsui teaches polyether-based polyurethane loses rubber elasticity at a low temperature, for example, at a temperature of 0 ° C. or less, it is used, for example, for applications that may be used below freezing such as aquaculture nets. could not. Therefore, in reality, it is strongly desired to improve the elastic recovery characteristics (cold resistance) of polyether polyurethane elastic fibers at low temperatures. The polyurethane elastic fiber of the present invention has a high elongation and a soft stretch feeling, and has excellent low-temperature properties such as elastic properties not being impaired at low temperatures, strength reduction and settling. In addition, it has excellent heat resistance to prevent power reduction, thread breakage, settling, and the like even in high-temperature heat treatment in the post-processing step of the fiber or the knitted product. Further, the knitted product made of the fiber has a good texture and feel.
Matsui teaches measuring the soft segment melting point by placing about 5 mg of an elastic resin molded product (polyurethane elastic fiber filament) is cut into about 2 mm or less, placed in a simple hermetically sealed container, and subjected to 50 ml / min using a differential scanning calorimeter (DSC-220C type manufactured by Seiko Instruments Inc.). The measurement was carried out in a nitrogen gas stream.
Matsui teaches placing the polyurethane fiber in a hermetically sealed container as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to place a polyurethane fiber in a hermetically sealed package motivated to test for the soft segment melting point.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A STEELE whose telephone number is (571)272-7115. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/JENNIFER A STEELE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789