DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-11 are currently pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 1-11 is objected to because of the following informality:
Claim 1 recites the phrase “a unit based on a monomer (b) shown below”. However, given that no specific structure or formula corresponding to a unit of (b) is shown in claim 1, the phrase “shown below” may be deleted.
Claims 1-11 recite the phrase “water repellent oil repellent”. The phrase should be amended to recited “water repellent and oil repellent”.
Appropriate corrections and/or clarification are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 103
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.
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 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hung et al. (US 2012/0245383 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hung teaches fluoroolefins of the formula:
Rf-O-(CH2-CF2)n(CH2CF2)m-CH=CH2
wherein n is 1 or 2, m is 0 or 1 and Rf may be C1-C8 fluoroalkoxy group (Ab., [0005]), and a flouroolefin of the following formula as a species thereof:
C3F7O-[CF(CF3)CF2O]p-CF2CF2-CH=CH2,
wherein, p is an integer 1 to 3 [0021] (reads on claimed monomer (a) of formula (I)). That is, in the claimed formula (I), p=0 and q=1.
Hung teaches fluoroelastomers comprising units of a fluoroolefin of the above formula and a comonomer, such as tetrafluoroethylene, chlorotrifluoroethylene, vinylidene fluoride, vinyl fluoride etc. (read on monomer (b)) [0026]-[0033], for producing seals, gaskets etc. having good oil resistance [0036]. A fluoroelastomer based on C3F7O-[CF(CF3)CF2O]p-CF2CF2-CH=CH2 and the comonomer meets the limitations of the claimed fluorine-containing polymer.
Although Hung discloses the use of other species of fluoroolefin, Applicant’s attention is drawn to MPEP 2131.02 (A) which states that “...when the species is clearly named, the species claim is anticipated no matter how many other species are additionally named”. Ex Parte A, 17 USPQ2d 1716 (BPAI, 1990).
Regarding the recitation “A water repellent oil repellent agent composition” in the preamble (cf. independent claim 1), it is deemed to be a statement of purpose or intended use which is not seen to result in any structural difference between the instantly claimed invention and Hung et al. and hence the preamble fails to limit the claim. MPEP 2111.02.
Regarding claim 9, Hung teaches preparing a fluoropolymer by suspension, emulsion or solution polymerization processes [0035], and polymerization of monomers in the presence of ammonium persulfate (reads on initiator) [0043]-[0044].
In light of above, presently cited claims are anticipated by the reference.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Hung et al. (US 2012/0245383 A1).
The discussion on Hung from paragraph 6 above is incorporated herein by reference.
Hung is silent on a fluorine-containing polymer comprising units (a) and unit (b) in one single embodiment as in the claimed invention.
Given the teaching in Hung on a genus of comonomers that includes vinyl fluoride [0027], it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to prepare a copolymer comprising any of the disclosed fluoroolefin monomers and comonomers, including a copolymer within the scope of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koike et al. (US 5,453,549).
Koike teaches a highly copolymerizable hexafluoropropylene oxide oligoether derivative of the following formula (Ab., Examples, ref. claim 1):
PNG
media_image1.png
106
398
media_image1.png
Greyscale
When X-fluorine, the disclosed formula encompasses claimed formula (1), i.e., in the claimed formula (1), p=0 and q=1. Additionally, Koike teaches bi- and terpolymers thereof with fluoroolefins, such as TFE and fluoroalkylvinyl ether (read on comonomer (b)). A copolymer of the above compound with X=F and a comonomer meets the limitations of the claimed fluorine-containing polymer. Additionally, the discussion on the preamble from paragraph 6 above is incorporated herein by reference.
In light of above, the presently cited claim is anticipated by the reference.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Hiroyuki et al. (US2020/0270439 A1), in view of Takaoka et al. (US 4,987,267).
Regarding claim 1, Hara teaches a fluorocopolymer dispersion having excellent water and oil repellency for treating articles, comprising a fluorinated copolymer comprising units of monomers:
CH2=CH-Rf (Rf 1-8 perfluoroalkyl) (a), and
copolymerizable monomer (b)
(Ab., [0001]).
Hara is silent on a fluorine-containing copolymer comprising units of monomer (a) of formula (1) as claimed.
At the outset, it is noted that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP § 2144.05.
In a related field of endeavor, the secondary reference to Takaoka is directed to an oligohexafluoropropylene oxide compound terminated with a vinyl group of formula (I):
PNG
media_image2.png
88
374
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein n is 2 to 5, said compound being useful for preparing a polymer having good thermal resistance, chemical stability, non-adhesion properties, water and oil repellencies, and flexibility, when copolymerized with other monomers. Disclosed formula (I) encompasses isomers of the claimed monomer (a) with formula (I). That is, the claimed formula (I) having p=0, q=1 is an isomer of the disclosed formula (I) (Ab., col. 1, lines 45-col. 2, line 3).
Given the teaching in Takaoka on advantages conferred by a compound of formula (I), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Hara’s copolymers to include Takaoka’s monomer of formula (I), or an isomer thereof. A prima facie case of obviousness may be made when chemical compounds have very close structural similarities and similar utilities because compounds which are position isomers (compounds having the same radicals in physically different positions on the same nucleus) are generally of sufficiently close structural similarity that there is a presumed expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. In re Wilder, 563 F.2d 457, 195 USPQ 426 (CCPA 1977). “An obviousness rejection based on similarity in chemical structure and function entails the motivation of one skilled in the art to make a claimed compound, in the expectation that compounds similar in structure will have similar properties.” In re Payne, 606 F.2d 303, 313, 203 USPQ 245, 254 (CCPA 1979).
Regarding claim 2, Hara teaches monomer (b) of the formula:
CH2=CH-Q or CH2=CHCH2-Q
wherein Q is a halogen atom or an organic having an oxygen atom, a nitrogen atom or a sulfur atom as the binding terminal atom [0014], [0040].
Regarding claims 3 and 4, a carboxylic acid vinyl ester, an alkyl vinyl ether, a hydroxyalkyl vinyl ether, a vinyl halide, a carboxylic acid allyl ester, an alkyl allyl ether and a hydroxyalkyl allyl ether [0043].
Regarding claims 6, Hara teaches vinyl laurate and vinyl stearate (read on claimed vinyl carboxylate) [0045].
Regarding claims 5 and 8, Hara prescribes units (a) at 20 to 60 mol%, and units (b) at 40 to 80 mol% [0057]-[0058]. Additionally, monomer (a) may be for e.g., CH2=CH-CF3, and monomer (b) may be, for e.g., vinyl acetate [0017], [0045]. Given that the sum total of (a) and (b) may be 60 mol% or greater, it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to include Takaoka’s monomer in an amount up to 40 mol% to confer its advantageous properties. This range overlaps with the claimed wt.% range. For instance, when n=4 in Takaoka’s formula (I), the calculated mol. wt. is 762.10. When (a) CH2=CH-CF3 units are at 30 mol%, (b) units are at 40 mol%, and Takaoka’s formula (I), n=4 units are at 30 mol%, the calculated wt.% of vinyl acetate and Takaoka’s formula (I) units are about 34.4% (claim 5) and 78.3% (claim 8), respectively.
Regarding claim 7, Hara teaches vinyl acetate and vinyl stearate as suitable vinyl esters, i.e., equivalence thereof [0045]. Thus, a skilled artisan would have found it obvious to utilize an equivalent molar amount of vinyl acetate and vinyl stearate, based on their art recognized equivalence. Incorporating the discussion from paragraph 23 above, for a copolymer with (a) CH2=CH-CF3 at 30 mol%, (b) vinyl acetate at 30 mol%, (b) vinyl stearate at 30 mol%, and Takaoka’s formula (1), n=4, at 10 mol%, the calculated wt. % of vinyl acetate and vinyl stearate are 7.03% and 28.5%, respectively.
Regarding claim 9, the discussion from paragraphs 15-19 are incorporated herein by reference. Additionally, Hara teaches polymerizing monomers in the presence of initiators.
Regarding claim 10, the discussion on claim 8 from paragraph 23 above is incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding claim 11, Hara teaches treated articles [0132].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. JP2004-051595 A (Sakano et al., machine translation) and EP0571793 A1 (Koike et al.) teach monomers of overlapping scope, and copolymers thereof.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Satya Sastri at (571) 272 1112. The examiner can be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5.30PM (EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone
are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Mr. Robert Jones can be reached at (571)-270-
7733. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is
assigned is (571) 273 8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent
Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to
the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-
free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to
the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-
1000.
/Satya B Sastri/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762