CTNF 18/447,540 CTNF 87766 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement 06-49-06 AIA The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered. 06-49-09 AIA The information disclosure statement filed 08/21/2023 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. Specification 06-16 AIA Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is not a concise explanation of the invention, but it repeats the claim limitation. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “ SiOC-bonded polyether siloxanes “ should be spelled out . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: It appears that the claim invokes a Markush Group, therefore, it should be amended as follow: “ selected from the group consisting of ..” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim 12 is 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. Claim 12 recites “… greater than 1013.25 hPa. “ This is a range with unbounded upper limit, and as such, it is unclear as to the extent of pressure Applicant is intending to seek patent protection of; as such, the claim is rendered indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-15, and 17-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knott et al. (US 2020/0377686 A1) (“Knott” herein) and further in view of Schubert et al. (US 2019/0106369 A1) (“Schubert’ herein) . Claim 1 Knott discloses a process for producing one or more alkoxysiloxanes by a thermal reaction of at least one waste silicone with at least one alkali metal alkoxide and at least one alcohol, wherein the process comprises: [0039] (a) reacting the at least one waste silicone [0049-0051, 0060] , by mixing with at least one alcohol [0074 , 0077] and at least one alkali [0078 with heating but without removing any potentially occurring water from the reaction mixture, [0072-0073] and (b) neutralizing the reaction mixture resulting from the reacting by neutralization with this reaction using at least one Bronsted acid, and optionally with an addition of at least one solvent, and separating, by filtration the solid constituents ,[0041-0048] and (c) subsequently isolating the alkoxysilane(s) by thermal separation of volatile compounds. [0059-0066, 0080-0081] Knott however does not explicitly disclose the at least one alkali as alkali metal alkoxide. Schubert teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0031-0032 →Schubert teaches this limitation in that the alkoxylation products employed in step a) are alkali-catalysed alkoxylation products. These are known per se to one skilled in the art. Said products may be produced by the methods known in the prior art in the presence of alkali metal hydroxide or alkali metal alkoxide catalysts and normally comprise 100 ppm to 6000 ppm, preferably 500 ppm to 4000 ppm, of alkali metals. Widespread products are for example alkali-catalysed alkoxylates that have been synthesized using sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide, sodium methoxide and/or potassium methoxide.) for the purpose of providing a provision of a mild, environmentally-friendly and efficient method of purifying alkali-catalysed alkoxylation products and also the provision of correspondingly purified alkoxylation products. [0015] Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Knott with the above limitation, as taught by Schubert , in order to provide the provision of a mild, environmentally-friendly and efficient method of purifying alkali-catalysed alkoxylation products and also the provision of correspondingly purified alkoxylation products. Claim 2 Knott discloses the process according Claim 1, wherein in the reacting (a) at least one additional siloxane is selected from the group consisting of hexamethylcyclotrisiloxane (D3), octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4), decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5), dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane (D6), mixtures of cyclic branched siloxanes of the D/T type, silicone oils, polydimethylsiloxane diols and α,o-divinylsiloxanes is added. [0049-0051, 0092-0094] Claim 3 Knott discloses the process according to Claim 1 , wherein the reacting is undertaken without the use of a water-binding silicic esters. [0060-0063] Claim 4 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1. Knott however does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one alkali metal alkoxide conforms to the general formula [M+ ] [OR- ], wherein M is selected from the group consisting of alkali metals Li, Na or K, and R represents a linear, branched or cyclic alkyl radical. (Same as claim 1) Claim 5 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the at least one alcohol employed in the reacting selected from the group consisting of linear, branched and cyclic C ₁ to C ₁₀ alkanols, and an isomer relevant thereof to the selected group is included. [0074, 0077] Claim 6 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the at least one alcohol is employed in total amounts of 10% to 200% by mass, based on the total mass of a silicone altogether employed in the reaction which equals the sum of the mass of the altogether employed at least one waste silicone plus the optionally also added mass of optional, further siloxane. [0074, 0077] Claim 7 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1. Knott however does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one alkali metal alkoxide is employed in a total amount of 1% to 10% by mass, based on the total mass of a silicone altogether employed in the reaction which equals the sum of the mass of altogether employed at least one waste silicone plus the optionally also added mass of optional, further siloxane . (Same as claim 1) Claim 8 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the at least one Brønsted acid added in the neutralizing second process step (b) is an anhydrous mineral acid and/or an anhydrous organic acid, wherein the at least one solvent is selected from the group consisting of alkanes, alkylaromatics, alcohols, hexamethylcyclotrisiloxane (D3), octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4), decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5) and dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane (D6) is added in the neutralizing second process step (b). [0041-0048] Claim 10 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the thermal reaction of the at least one waste silicone in the reacting first step (a) is undertaken at temperatures between 50°C and 200°C. [0052, 0072-0073] Claim 11 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein characterized in that the thermal reaction of the at least one waste silicone in the reacting is performed over a period of 1 to 12 hours. [0072-0073] Claim 12 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the thermal reaction of the at least one waste silicone in the reacting at a pressure greater than 1013.25 hPa. [0053] Claim 13 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the at least one waste silicone is mechanically comminuted before the thermal reaction . [0049-0051] Claim 14 Knott discloses an alkoxysiloxanes obtainable in the process according to claim 1. [0056, 0063, 0066] Claim 15 Knott discloses the alkoxysiloxanes according to Claim 14, which are suitable as polymerization-active masses. [0066, 0066] Claim 17 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein reacting the at least one waste silicone by mixing with at least one alcohol is completed without solvents which form an azeotrope with water and/or without dehydrating agents. [0072-0074] Claim 18 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the reacting is undertaken without tetraalkoxysilanes. (See claim 1) Claim 19 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1. Knott however does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one alkali metal alkoxide conforms to the general formula [M+ ] [OR- ], wherein M is selected from the group consisting of alkali metals Na or K, and R represents a linear, branched or cyclic alkyl radical . (Same as claim 1) Claim 21 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the at least one alcohol is employed in total amounts of 20% to 100% by mass, based on the total mass of a silicone altogether employed in the reaction which equals the sum of the mass of the altogether employed at least one waste silicone plus the optionally also added mass of optional, further siloxane. . [0074, 0077] Claim 22 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1. Knott however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the at least one alkali metal alkoxide is employed in a total amount of 2% to 7% by mass, based on the total mass of a silicone altogether employed in the reaction which equals the sum of the mass of altogether employed at least one waste silicone plus the optionally also added mass of optional, further siloxane. (Same as claim 1) Claim 23 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the at least one Brønsted acid added in the neutralizing is anhydrous mineral acid and/or anhydrous organic acid, selected from the group of anhydrous sulfuric acid, anhydrous perchloric acid and/or anhydrous acetic acid. [0041-0048] Claim 24 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the thermal reaction of the at least one waste silicone in the reacting is undertaken at temperatures between 80°C and 180°C. [0052, 0072-0073] Claim 25 Knott discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein the thermal reaction of the at least one waste silicone in the reacting is performed over a period of 2 to 8 hours. [0052, 0072-0073] Claim 26 Knott discloses the alkoxysiloxanes according to Claim 14, which are suitable as adhesives and/or sealants. [0056, 0066] 07-22-aia AIA Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knott, Schubert , as applied to claim s 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Knott et al. (US 2021/0163687 A1) (‘687” herein) Claim 16 Knott discloses the alkoxysiloxanes according process according to claim 14. Knott however does not explicitly which are suitable for producing SiOC-bonded polyether siloxanes by transesterification of the alkoxysiloxanes with polyetherols in the presence of zinc acetylacetonate as catalyst. ‘687 teaches the above limitation (See paragraph 0057 & 0059 → ‘687 teaches this limitation in that compounds capable of catalyzing the reaction of the acetoxysiloxane with polyether monools include in particular any Brönsted acids, preferably the simple mineral acids and methanesulfonic acid (cf. example 8), phosphoric acid, phosphonic acids and/or else acidic salt-like compounds such as triflate salts, in particular bismuth triflate, and/or any Lewis-acidic compounds such as tin and organotin compounds, titanate esters, tetraalkoxy titanates, zinc acetylacetonate, zinc acetate and trispentafluorphenylborane. A very particularly preferably employed condensation catalyst is trichloroacetic acid. Such use of condensation catalysts, in particular trichoroacetic acid, corresponds to a particularly preferred embodiment of the invention. According to the invention the trichloroacetic acid amount to be employed in the context of a preferred embodiment is in the range from preferably 0.1 to 0.7 percent by mass, based on the total amount of the reactants provided for the SiOC-bond forming reaction (α,ω-diacetoxypolydimethylsiloxane plus polyether monool).) for the purpose of forming part of the subject matter of the invention is the use of this preparation produced by the process according to the invention as described hereinabove as a surfactant additive in noncorrosive cleaning solutions, as defoamers, as foam stabilizers, wetting agents, paint and flow additives and as demulsifiers. [0096] Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Knott, with the above limitation, as taught by ‘687, in order form part of the subject matter of the invention is the use of this preparation produced by the process according to the invention as described hereinabove as a surfactant additive in noncorrosive cleaning solutions, as defoamers, as foam stabilizers, wetting agents, paint and flow additives and as demulsifiers . Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-14, and 17-25 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of copending Application No. 18/588,296 (‘296 herein) Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application independent claim including the dependent claims are included in the application ‘296. All the claims dependent of claim 1 are also rejected. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 1-14 and 17-25 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 4, 8-19, 19-20 of copending Application No. 18/874, 202 (‘202 herein) and in further view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter, “Admission”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application independent claim including the dependent claims are included in the application ‘202. The instant application however does not explicitly disclose the waste silicone as a siliconized paper. Admissions teaches that ¶ [0013-0025, page 1] The silicone coating of certain sheetlike structures, more particularly both paper and polymeric sheetlike structures, is known practice in order to modify the surface of the sheetlike structure, so as to generate a non-stick surface, for example. These are then referred to as siliconized sheetlike structures, i.e. siliconized sheetlike structures are silicone-coated sheetlike structures. Silicone-coated papers or polymeric films of this kind are available on the market for a variety of end uses. Silicone-coated paper, also referred to as siliconized paper in the context of this invention, can be used, for example, as base paper for pressure-sensitive adhesive labels, self-adhesive films and self-adhesive tapes or as release paper for PVC film manufacture. This coated paper accumulates in considerable quantities at the premises both of manufacturers and of users, and by far the largest proportion of this paper, after having fulfilled its function, is sent to landfill or disposed of thermally - that is, incinerated. To date, only in exceptional cases have lower-quality papers been produced from these papers, for packaging uses. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the waste silicone of the instant application as a waste silicone paper, as taught by Admissions, in order to have physical reutilization of siliconized papers. [0010-0011, page1 ] All the claims dependent of claim 1 are also rejected. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ichinohe (US 5147965 A) Method For The Preparation Of A Higher Alkoxy-substituted Organopolysiloxane teaches The invention provides a method for the preparation of a higher alkoxy-substituted organopolysiloxane having, in a molecule, at least one alkoxy group of 4 to 30 carbon atoms bonded to the silicon atom. The method comprises: mixing an organohydrogenpolysiloxane, a higher aliphatic alcohol to provide the desired alkoxy groups, a platinum compound as a catalyst for the dehydrogenation reaction between silicon-bonded hydrogen atoms and the alcohol and an organic acid, e.g., acetic and citric acids, as a co-catalyst to promote the reaction; and heating the mixture, Favresse et al. (US 2020/0377663 A1) Tailored SiOC-based Polyethersiloxanes teaches SiOC-based polyethersiloxanes are prepared based on linear α,ω-hydroxy group-bearing siloxanes. In a first step, α,ω-acetoxy group-bearing linear polysiloxanes are prepared. In a second step, the α,ω-acetoxy group-bearing linear polysiloxanes are converted into the desired organosiloxane units, preferably shorter organosiloxane units, wherein the thus converted organosiloxane units have α,ω-acetoxy groups. In a third step, the α,ω-acetoxy group-bearing linear polysiloxanes from step 2 react with polyetherols to give SiOC-based polyethersiloxanes, and Knott et al. (US 2021/0163687 A1) LINEAR POLYDIMETHYLSILOXANE-POLYOXYALKYLENE BLOCK COPOLYMERS OF THE STRUCTURE TYPE ABA teaches Equilibrated trifluoromethanesulfonic acid-acidified α,ω-diacetoxypolydimethylsiloxanes, processes for the production thereof and SiOC-bonded, linear polydimethylsiloxane-polyoxyalkylene block copolymers of the structure type ABA and a process for the production thereof are described, wherein the production of SiOC-bonded, linear polydimethylsiloxane-polyoxyalkylene block copolymers of the structure type ABA is effected by reacting trifluoromethanesulfonic acid-acidified acetoxysiloxane with polyetherols optionally in the presence of bases and optionally in the presence of an inert solvent . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SILVANA C RUNYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5415. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30. 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, Doug Hutton can be reached at 571-272-4137. 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. /SILVANA C RUNYAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 02/25/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 2 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 3 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 4 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 5 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 6 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 7 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 8 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 9 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 10 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 11 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 12 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 13 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 14 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 15 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 16 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 17 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 18 Art Unit: 3674 Application/Control Number: 18/447,540 Page 19 Art Unit: 3674