Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/383,823

APPLIED PAPER OVERLAY WITH IMPROVED ELASTICITY AND FLEXIBILITY FOR USE WITH ENGINEERED WOOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 25, 2023
Examiner
GOLDEN, CHINESSA T
Art Unit
1788
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Louisiana-Pacific Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
57%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
58%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 57% of resolved cases
57%
Career Allow Rate
385 granted / 679 resolved
-8.3% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+1.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
711
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
63.5%
+23.5% vs TC avg
§102
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 679 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 . 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 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. 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 1-3, 8, 10, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al. (US Patent Application No. 2009/0162680) in view of Lloyd et al. (US Patent No. 3,455,733). Regarding claim 1, Zheng et al. teach a composite wood product (page 1, paragraphs [0008]-[0010], page 2, paragraph [0018]) comprising a multiple layer substrate comprising wood strands (page 1, paragraphs [0008]-[0010], page 2, paragraph [0018]), said substrate comprising an upper face (page 1, paragraphs [0008]-[0010], page 2, paragraph [0018]); an overlay affixed to the upper surface (page 5, paragraph [0041]), said overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 5, paragraph [0041]). Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Lloyd et al. teach a cellulosic substrate impregnated with a butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (col. 1, lines 20-30). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the butylated melamine formaldehyde of Lloyd et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. in order to produce a laminate at low cost and exhibits a high degree of crack and craze resistance (Lloyd et al., col. 1, lines 40-50). Regarding claim 2, Zheng et al. teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component does not comprise methylated melamine formaldehyde resin (entire document). Regarding claim 3, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin comprises 100% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Lloyd et al. teach a cellulosic substrate impregnated with a butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (col. 1, lines 20-30), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises 100% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (col. 1, lines 20-30). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the butylated melamine formaldehyde of Lloyd et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. in order to produce a laminate at low cost and exhibits a high degree of crack and craze resistance (Lloyd et al., col. 1, lines 40-50). Regarding claim 8, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin comprises approximately 50% to approximately 100% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Lloyd et al. teach a cellulosic substrate impregnated with a butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (col. 1, lines 20-30), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises 100% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (col. 1, lines 20-30). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the butylated melamine formaldehyde of Lloyd et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. in order to produce a laminate at low cost and exhibits a high degree of crack and craze resistance (Lloyd et al., col. 1, lines 40-50). Regarding claim 10, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin comprises approximately 75% to approximately 100% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Lloyd et al. teach a cellulosic substrate impregnated with a butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (col. 1, lines 20-30), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises 100% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (col. 1, lines 20-30). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the butylated melamine formaldehyde of Lloyd et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. in order to produce a laminate at low cost and exhibits a high degree of crack and craze resistance (Lloyd et al., col. 1, lines 40-50). Regarding claim 14, Zheng et al. teach wherein the overlay is a paper overlay (page 5, paragraph [0041]). Regarding claim 15, Zheng et al. teach wherein the overlay is not fissured (entire document). Claims 4-7, 9, 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al. (US Patent Application No. 2009/0162680) in view of Lloyd et al. (US Patent No. 3,455,733), in further view of Ong et al. (US Patent Application No. 2008/0017307). Zheng et al. and Lloyd et al. are relied upon as disclosed above. Regarding claim 4, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 1% to approximately 10% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Ong et al. teach a laminate comprising an overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (page 1, paragraph [0015], page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]). Ong et al. do not disclose wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 1% to approximately 10% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in amount involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde resin in order to provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde of Ong et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). Regarding claim 5, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 10% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Ong et al. teach a laminate comprising an overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprising butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (page 1, paragraph [0015], page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]). Ong et al. do not disclose wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 10% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in amount involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde resin in order to provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde of Ong et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). Regarding claim 6, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 10% to approximately 25% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Ong et al. teach a laminate comprising an overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprising butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (page 1, paragraph [0015], page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]). Ong et al. do not disclose wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 10% to approximately 25% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in amount involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde resin in order to provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde of Ong et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). Regarding claim 7, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde component comprises approximately 25% to approximately 50% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Ong et al. teach a laminate comprising an overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprising butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (page 1, paragraph [0015], page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]). Ong et al. do not disclose wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 25% to approximately 50% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in amount involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde resin in order to provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde of Ong et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). Regarding claim 9, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde component comprises approximately 50% to approximately 75% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Ong et al. teach a laminate comprising an overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprising butylated melamine formaldehyde resin (page 1, paragraph [0015], page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]). Ong et al. do not disclose wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 50% to approximately 75% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in amount involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde resin in order to provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde of Ong et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). Regarding claim 11, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde component comprises approximately 50% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and approximately 50% methylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Ong et al. teach a laminate comprising an overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprising butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and methylated melamine formaldehyde resin (page 1, paragraph [0015], page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]). Ong et al. do not disclose wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprises approximately 50% butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and 50% methylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in amount involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and methylated melamine formaldehyde resin in order to provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and methylated melamine formaldehyde resin of Ong et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). Regarding claim 12, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component further comprises methylated melamine formaldehyde resin. However, Ong et al. teach a laminate comprising an overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprising butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and methylated melamine formaldehyde resin (page 1, paragraph [0015], page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the methylated melamine formaldehyde resin of Ong et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). Regarding claim 13, Zheng et al. fail to teach wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component is a combination of said butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and methylated melamine formaldehyde resin, wherein the percentage amount of each sum to 100%. However, Ong et al. teach a laminate comprising an overlay comprising a melamine formaldehyde resin component (page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]), wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component comprising butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and methylated melamine formaldehyde resin (page 1, paragraph [0015], page 2, paragraphs [0022], [0023]). Ong et al. do not disclose wherein the melamine formaldehyde resin component is a combination of said butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and methylated melamine formaldehyde resin, wherein the percentage amount of each sum to 100%. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in amount involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the amount of butylated melamine formaldehyde resin and methylated melamine formaldehyde resin in order to provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the methylated melamine formaldehyde resin of Ong et al. in the overlay of Zheng et al. provide excellent grease and water resistance and low flammability (Ong et al., page 1, paragraph [0005]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHINESSA GOLDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5543. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday; 8:00 - 4:00 EST. 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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached on 571-272-1490. 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. /Chinessa T. Golden/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 7/31/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 25, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600880
STEERING WHEEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595400
COMPOSITIONS AND ADHESIVE ARTICLES INCLUDING POROUS POLYMERIC PARTICLES AND METHODS OF COATING SUBSTRATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595625
HEAT SEALABLE BARRIER PAPERBOARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577361
BIODEGRADABLE FOAMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576551
MODIFIED WOOD AND TRANSPARENT WOOD COMPOSITES, AND SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR FORMING AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
57%
Grant Probability
58%
With Interview (+1.4%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 679 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month