DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This application is a national stage entry under 35 U.S.C. §371 of International Application No. PCT/EP2022/055094 filed 3/1/2022.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(a)-(d) by Application No. DE 10 2021 202 102.6 filed 3/4/2021, which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Claims 1-44 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 32 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 32 recites …polyolfein blends… in line 5, and it appears Applicant intended to recite …polyolefin blends…
Appropriate correction is required.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I claims 22-34 in the reply filed on 4/142026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Schambony does not teach a specific combination of sulfite + polymeric HALS.
This is not found persuasive because Schambony et al. (US 20090264566) does disclose the option of a combination of sulfite + polymeric HALS and therefore a reasonable expectation of achieving the claimed combination. Nevertheless, the present rection relies on Michels et al. (US 2019/0135990) wherein a combination of the claimed stabilizer sulfite + polymeric HALS is at least suggested.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 22-25, 30-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michels et al. (US 2019/0135990).
Regarding claim 22: Michels is directed to a method of stabilizing an organic material comprising combining the organic material with at least one stabilizer composition, said at least one stabilizer composition comprises at least one sulfite and/or at least one thiosulfate. Specifically, a thiosulfate is disclosed ([0075]). A further stabilizer of a hindered amine stabilizer (HALS) can be included ([0103]) (defined by the present invention as a polymeric or oligomeric hindered amine).
While Michels doesn’t mention a single resin composition simultaneously comprising the aforementioned components in a single composition, it would have been obvious to have selected such a composition since Michels discloses finite number of identified, predictable options and one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to have selected a composition comprising at least one sulfite and/or at least one thiosulfate. A further stabilizer of a hindered amine stabilizer (HALS) can be included ([0103]) to arrive at the present claim 1.
Regarding claim 23: The composition are used to stabilize the organic material against heat stability and resistance against oxidative decomposition ([0028]).
Regarding claim 24: The stabilizers are used to produce a thermoplastic moulding composition (equivalent to plastics).
Regarding claim 25: The plastics are either virgin or recyclates and mixtures and combinations thereof since no other option is possible.
Regarding claim 30: The stabilizer composition is added in an amount of 0.01-10 wt% based on the organic material to be stabilized of a graft copolymer ([0271] Michels).
Regarding claim 31: The optional HALS stabilizer is included in an amount of 0.01-20% by weight ([0102]-[0103]) and the sulfite/thiosulfate is included in an amount of 0.1-65% by weight ([0076]). Hence, a ratio of 1:99 to 99:1 is well within the scope of Michels.
Regarding claim 32: The plastic to be stabilized in Michels are graft copolymers including ABS (abstract).
Regarding claims 33-34: The composition can comprise additives of claim 34 ([0104] Michels).
Claims 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michaels as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (WO 2015/032033).
The machine translation of WO 2015032033, herein “Liu”, is provided with this office action.
Regarding claims 26-27: Michaels discloses the sulfite or thiosulfate is an organic sulfite or thiosulfate, although doesn’t mention an inorganic sulfite or thiosulfate.
Liu is directed to an antioxidant composition for polymer resins, comprising a hindered phenol, phosphite ester or thioester, and an inorganic sulfite including sodium sulfite, magnesium sulfite, sulfite clock, calcium sulfite, sodium hydrogen sulfite, potassium hydrogen sulfite, or a mixture thereof, preferably calcium sulfite or sodium sulfite. The thioesters are the same as those taught in Michaels, e.g. dodecyl thiodipropionate.
One skilled in the art would have been motivated to have included an inorganic sulfite in the composition of Michaels since it is used as a reducing agent that reacts with oxygen in the air and reduces yellowing, and reduce costs (p. 3 Liu).
Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michaels as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Van Mierloo et al. (US 2017 /0088689).
Regarding claim 28: Michaels doesn’t mention a number average molecular weight of the HALS stabilizer.
Van Mierloo is directed to a stabilizer composition comprising hindered amines. Suitable hindered amines include those with a molecular weight of at least 1250 or more (abstract Van Mierloo). One skilled in the art would have been motivated to have selected the hindered amines of Van Mierloo since they are resistant against heat and surprisingly against UV radiation (weathering) ([0048] Van Mierloo). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to have selected the hindered amines of Van Mierloo having a number average molecular weight within the scope of claim 28.
Regarding claim 29: Suitable hindered amines include those of
PNG
media_image1.png
223
489
media_image1.png
Greyscale
([0051] Van Mierloo).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT T BUTCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3514. The examiner can normally be reached Telework M-F 9-5 Pacific Time Zone.
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, 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.
/ROBERT T BUTCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Prosecution Insights