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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-13 are 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 1 recites “…500,000 or more of 20 or more percent in a region of a weight average molecular weight Mw of 100 or more of a molecular weight distribution as measured by gel permeation chromatography…” It is unclear what is meant by “of 100 or more of a molecular weight distribution.” The specification does not clarify what is intended by “of 100 or more of a molecular weight distribution,” nor do claims 2-13 which depend from claim 1. Therefore, claims 1 and all claims dependent thereon (2-13) are indefinite. Claim 1 could be clarified by removing “of 100 or more of a molecular weight distribution.”
Claim 2, lines 3-4, recite “of the constituent monomers.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the constituent monomers.” The claim does not previously refer to “constituent monomers” but refers to “constituent monomer units.” The issue could be clarified by changing “constituent monomers” in lines 3-4 to “constituent monomer units.”
Claim 11, lines 3-4 recites “ to obtain a molten polylactic acid resin; adding a compressive fluid to be melted in the polylactic acid resin composition; and extrusion expanding the polylactic acid resin composition…” The claim is indefinite because it recites “to obtain a molten polylactic acid resin,” and then makes no mention of what occurs with the molten polylactic acid resin. The claim could be clarified by, for example, “replacing adding a compressive fluid to be melted in the polylactic acid resin composition; and extrusion expanding the polylactic acid resin composition” with –a compressive fluid to the molten polylactic acid composition to form a mixture; and extrusion expanding the mixture--.
Prior Art
The claims are indefinite for the reasons discussed above. However, there are no prior art rejections over in the instant claims. The primary reason that the prior art fails to disclose the instantly claimed invention is the recitation in claim 1 of a polylactic acid resin having (1) a melt viscosity of 2,000 to 40,000 Pa•s at 190ºC and (2) has a region of weight average molecular weight Mw of 1,000 or less of 10 or less percent and a region of a weight average molecular weight Mw of 500,000 or more of 20 or more percent in a region as measured by gel permeation chromatography.
The closest prior art references are the following: (1) Hashida et al. (US 2022/0162377); (2) Kumai et al. (US 2022/0162415); (3) Shinohara et al. (US 2014/0336289).
Hashida et al. teach an article comprising a polylactic acid comprising 90 mol% to 98 mol% of D-lactic acid or L-lactic acid (abstract). The polylactic acid makes up 97% or more of the organic matter in the article (abstract). The polylactic acid resin is kneaded with a compressive fluid (¶131). While Hashida et al. teaches that it is known to add a compressive fluid to reduce melt viscosity, and that a higher melt viscosity is preferable, Hashida fails to teach a specific melt viscosity of the disclosed polylactic acid resin composition, let alone a melt viscosity of 2,000 to 40,000 Pa•s at 190ºC. Hashida also fails to disclose that the polylactic acid resin has a region of weight average molecular weight Mw of 1,000 or less of 10 or less percent and a region of a weight average molecular weight Mw of 500,000 or more of 20 or more percent in a region as measured by gel permeation chromatography.
Kumai et al. teach a polylactic acid composition comprising a crosslinked polylactic acid. The crosslinked polylactic acid has a weight average molecular weight of from 200,000 to 400,000, preferably 250,000 to 350,000 (abstract). Kumai teaches that when the weight average molecular weight is 400,000 or less, the increase in the melt viscosity can be suppressed. See abstract. Kumai et al. teach that incorporation of a compressive fluid can reduce melt viscosity of a polylactic acid resin (see ¶116). Kumai et al. fail to teach a specific melt viscosity of the polylactic acid composition, let alone a melt viscosity of 2,000 to 40,000 Pa•s at 190ºC. Kumai et al. also fails to disclose that the polylactic acid resin has a region of weight average molecular weight Mw of 1,000 or less of 10 or less percent and a region of a weight average molecular weight Mw of 500,000 or more of 20 or more percent in a region as measured by gel permeation chromatography.
Shinohara et al. teach a polylactic-acid based resin particles produced from a foamable resin composition, the foamable resin composition comprising a modified polylactic acid resin (abstract). As shown in Table 2, the PLA resin has a melt viscosity in Pa•s at 190ºC, of 2920, 2830, 990, or 2830. As shown in Table 2, the PLA resin of Shinohara has a melt viscosity in Pa•s at 190ºC of 5530; 3870; 4780; 4780; or 3940. Shinohara et al. fails to teach that the polylactic acid resin has a region of weight average molecular weight Mw of 1,000 or less of 10 or less percent and a region of a weight average molecular weight Mw of 500,000 or more of 20 or more percent in a region as measured by gel permeation chromatography. Shinohara et al. also provides factually supported objective evidence that the melt viscosity in Pa•s at 190ºC required by the polylactic acid resin of the instant claims is not necessarily present in PLA resin, as shown by the Example having a melt viscosity of 990 Pa•s at 190ºC, which is outside the range required by instant claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to K. B BOYLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7338. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am to 5pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571) 272-1302. 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.
/K. BOYLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights