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. Claims 1-15 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, 9- 12, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 2881444 A1 (“Shimada”) . The aforementioned reference was made of record with applicant’s IDS dated 23 April 2025. As to claim s 1 and 2 , Shimada teaches a water and oil repellent, thus liquid repellent composition (abstract). Shimada teaches the use of a copolymer (B) in such composition (abstract). As an example, example 12 of Shimada, table 4 is a polymer formed from monomers including DOM, dioctyl maleate, which meets formula (a) with Q1 and Q2 each being -C(O)O- as required by claims 1 and 2, R1 and R2 each being a monovalent hydrocarbon group having 8 carbon atoms. As to claims 9 and 10, the same example of Shimada includes vinyl chloride monomer. As to claim 11, example 12 further includes units based on HEMA, hydroxyethyl methacrylate, which meets formula (d) with R5 being methyl, R6 being a monovalent hydrocarbon group with a hydroxyl substituent. As to claim 12, Shimada teaches that copolymer B contains a unit having a crosslinkable functional group (abstract), exemplified by example 12, having HEMA, hydroxyethyl methacrylate, acknowledged by applicant (see specification, para. 0042) to be a unit having a crosslinkable functional group. As to claim s 14 and 15 , Shimada teaches applying the composition containing polymer B’-11 (example 12) (Table 7, example 20) to a cloth, a substrate, thus treating a substrate with the liquid repellent composition to form an article of a substrate treated with the composition (paras. 0182-0184). Claim(s) 1 -6 , 11, and 13- 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by GB 472,613 (“Groves”). As to claims 1-3, Groves teaches a composition for waterproofing textile materials containing a polymer of maleic acid di-octadecyl ester (p. 2), which meets formula (a) where Q1 and Q2 are each -C(=O)-O- as required by claims 1 and 2, R1 and R2 are ach a monovalent hydrocarbon group of 18 C atoms as required by claims 1 and 3. Groves does not discuss oil-repellency, but given the identity of the polymer to that recited, it is reasonable to presume the composition also provides oil repellency. As to claims 4-6, Groves teaches the polymer further including a vinyl ethyl ether, which meets the recitation for monomer (b) of claims 4-6, with R3 bring -O-R4 with R4 being an ethyl group. As to claim 11, Groves teaches example 4 of a polymer of maleic acid dihexadecyl ester and methyl methacrylate, which meets the definition of formula (d) where R4 is methyl and R6 is methyl. As to claim 13, the examples of Groves include no fluorine in the polymer. As to claims 14 and 15, the examples of Groves all teach treating fabric substrate with the composition. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-8, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2,998,326 (“ Ellenbogen ”). As to claims 1 and 2 , Ellenbogen teaches a fabric sizing agent including a copolymer of d ioctyl maleate and vinyl acetate (col. 4, example 1). Dioctyl maleate meets formula (a) where Q1 and Q2 are -C(=O)-O- a required by claims 1 and 2. Ellenbogen teaches sizings provide water repellency (col. 1), but does not mention oil repellency. Given the identity of the polymer of Ellenbogen , is presumed to have oil repellent characteristics. As to claims 4-6, Ellenbogen teaches a copolymer with vinyl acetate, which meets the recitation of claims 4-6 where R3 in formula (b1) is -O-C(=O)-R4 where R4 is methyl. As to claims 7 and 8, Ellenbogen teaches 44 mol percent dioctyl maleate and 56 mol percent vinyl acetate, which is calculated as providing 76 wt % of monomer (a) and 24 wt % monomer (b). As to claim 13, the aforementioned resin does not contain fluorine. As to claims 14 and 15, the composition is used for sizing fabrics, thus articles comprising fabric substrate treated with the composition. Claim(s) 1-8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2013-056956 A (“Kanehara”). A partial machine translation is enclosed. As to claims 1-3, Kanehara teaches a polymer, thus a compositions of a polymer, the polymer comprising units from distearyl fumarate (para. 0036), which units meet formula (a) where Q1 and Q2 are -C(=O)-O- as required by claims 1 and 2, R1 and R2 are each monovalent hydrocarbon groups of 18 carbon atoms as required by claims 1 and 3. While Kanehara does not state this material is a liquid repellent composition, it is the same material as recited, and therefore presumed to be liquid repellent. As to claims 4-6, Kanehara teaches an example of a copolymer of the aforementioned distearyl fumarate and vinyl stearate (para. 00 38) . The latter monomer provides a unit of formula b1 of claim 5 where R3 is -O-C(=O)-R4 where R4 is an aliphatic hydrocarbon as required by claim 6, and thus R3 is deemed to meet the recitation of monomer (b) of claim 4 by having an electron donating group adjacent to the unsaturated group. As to claims 7 and 8, Kanehara teaches 40 g of distearyl fumarate to 10 g of vinyl stearate, which provides 80 % of monomer a and 20 % of monomer b as required by claims 7 and 8. As to claim 13, the polymers of paragraphs 0037 and 0038 lack fluorine. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim (s) 4- 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 2881444 A1 (“Shimada”) . The discussion of Shimada with respect to claim 1 is incorporated by reference. As to claims 4-6, while not exemplified, Shimada teaches that the crosslinking monomer of polymer (B) may be the recited type, including vinyl ether (para. 0065 , 0086 ), which compounds meet formula b1 of claim 5, where R3 is -O-R4 and R4 is a substituted aliphatic group (see, e.g., 2-hydroxyethylvinyl ether) as required by claim 6, and R3 is therefore an electron donating groups as required by claims 4 and 5. As to claim 7, while not exemplified, the dioctyl maleate is monomer b3 under the general teaching of Shimada (para. 0068, 0090), and Shimada teaches that such monomer units may be present in 5 to 35 % by mass preferably (para. 0095), and as such, the use of the monomer in such amounts is an obvious modification suggested by Shimada. As to claim 8, as discussed with respect to claims 4-6, Shimada teaches the use of vinyl ethers as crosslinking monomers b2, which meet the definition of recited unit (b1). Shimada teaches such monomers may be present in amounts from 5 to 50 mass percent (para. 0094), which overlaps the recited range, and thus amounts of such monomer unit are an obvious modification suggested b Shimada for suppressing peeling. As to claim 13, while not exemplified without a fluorine monomer, Shimada teaches that the essential components are a halogenated monomer, which may be chlorinated (paras. 0081-0083), and further monomers which may be those defined as a4 (not fluorinated) (paras. 0067-0068, 0088-0090). Claim (s) 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 472,613 (“Groves”). The discussion of Groves with respect to claim 1 is incorporated by reference. As to claims 9 and 10, while not exemplified with monomer (a), Groves teaches that the comonomer may be a number of vinyl monomers, including vinyl chloride (2:30-35), and therefore the use of such comonomer is an obvious modification suggested by Groves (see also, example 3, which differs only in that one of the ester groups is shorter than recited). Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2,998,326 (“ Ellenbogen ”). The discussion of Ellenbogen with respect to claim 1 is incorporated by reference. As to claim 3, while not exemplified, Ellenbogen teaches generally an ester of maleic of fumaric acids with alcohols, including dodecyl, lauryl, myristyl , and stearyl, all of which have the rechited hydrocarbon group length (2:25-35), and therefore the use of compounds of Formula (a) with longer R1 and R2 groups is an obvious modification suggested by Ellenbogen . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT KREGG T BROOKS whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (313)446-4888 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday to Friday 9 am to 5:30 pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Arrie Reuther can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-7026 . 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. /KREGG T BROOKS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764