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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-14) in the reply filed on June 8, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 15-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. The requirement is 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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LaPray et al (US 2019/0276664) in view of Ueda et al (US 2008/0036115).
Regarding claims 1, 4-6, and 11-13, LaPray teaches a thermoplastic starch-based material formed from:
a starch ([0051]) in the amount from 65 to 95 % by weight ([0051)]
a plasticizer ([0054]) in the amount from 12 to 35 % by weight ([0053])
a thermoplastic resin such as a polylactic acid ([0041])
It is noted that the diglycidyl ether is not mandatorily present.
LaPray teaches that a compatibilizer can be added to the composition ([0085]), however fails to teach the addition of a diacid or corresponding acid anhydride in the amount from 0.1 to 15 % by weight ([0033])
Ueda teaches a thermoplastic (PLA) ([0020]) and starch material ([0021]). Ueda incorporates a compatibilizer such as maleic acid or maleic anhydride ([0033]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the maleic acid/anhydride of Ueda be the compatibilizer of LaPray. One would have been motivated to do so in order to receive the expected benefit of improving the mechanical strength of the molded object (Ueda, [0034]).
Regarding claims 2-3, LaPray teaches that the plasticizer can be sorbitol ([0054]), and while glycerin is mentioned in [0054]), it is not mandatorily present, and therefore, the composition can be free from glycerin.
Regarding claim 14, LaPray teaches that the composition contains less than 1 % by weight water ([0054]) and this would be from any component in the composition.
Claim(s) 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LaPray et al (US 2019/0276664) in view of Ueda et al (US 2008/0036115) and Traugott et al (US 6,403,692).
The discussion regarding LaPray and Ueda in paragraph 4 above is incorporated here by reference.
Regarding claims 7-10, LaPray fails to teach the addition of a diglycidyl ether.
Traugott teaches a thermoplastic composition (Abstract) which incorporates 0.01 to 25 parts by weight (col. 11, lines 25-40) of a diglycidyl ether (col. 11, lines 20-25).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the diglycidyl ether of Traugott incorporated as an additive of the composition of LaPray. One would have been motivated to do so in order to receive the expected benefit of having ignition resistance properties (Traugott, col. 11, lines 15-30).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DORIS L LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-3872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 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, Arrie Lanee Reuther can be reached at 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.
DORIS L. LEE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1764
/DORIS L LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Prosecution Insights