DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-6 in the reply filed on July 30, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-14, 16 and 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on July 30, 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed September 2, 2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
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 1-6 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.
Regarding claim 1: The limitation for component (ii-a) “a polymer having multiple carboxylic acid” is indefinite. It is suggested to change the component name to “a polymer having multiple carboxylic acid groups”.
Regarding claim 3: In structure (I) of claim 3, R6 and R8 are shown as being divalent variables. However, the list of alternatives for R6 and R8 contains monovalent embodiments. R6 and R8 cannot be hydrogen or Y-OH, for example. Further, the divalent version of “alkyl” is “alkylene”, etc.
In structure (II) of claim 3, it is unclear what is meant by C704o cycloalkenyl as an alternative embodiment for the R moieties.
Claim 3 is further indefinite since the same variable Y has two different definitions within the same claim.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 2016/0053089) in view of Kolstad et al. (U.S. Pat. 6,114,495).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6: Yoo et al. teaches a polylactide resin composition (title) comprising a polylactide having a number average molecular weight of 50,000 to 200,000 (claim 4), which overlaps the claimed range, and 130 ppm by weight of a tin catalyst (para. 112), which is a Group 2-14 metal and overlaps the claimed range. Yoo et al. teaches the residual amount of lactide monomer remaining is 0.01-0.5 wt% based on the polylactic acid resin (para. 68), which overlaps the claimed range. Yoo et al. teaches a phosphoric acid ester based plasticizer (para. 63). Since the claim limitation states “and/or a residue thereof”, based on broadest reasonable interpretation, the plasticizer of Yoo et al. reads on the polyphosphoric acid. Yoo et al. also teaches a phosphite ester compound/bis(2,4-di-t-butylphenyl) pentaerythritol diphosphite (para. 61), which has a molecular weight of 604.7 g/mol and contains 10.24 wt% phosphorus, and has one aryl group in which at least one ring carbon ortho to a ring carbon bonded directly to a phosphite oxygen is directly bonded to a tertiary carbon atom of a substituent group. This compound is an antioxidant, which Yoo et al. teaches is used in an amount of 100-3000 ppmw (para. 56). Since there is 10.24 wt% phosphorus in the compound, if 100 ppm were selected, there would be 0.01024 grams phosphorus per kilogram of the polylactide, and if 3,000 ppm where selected, there would be 0.3072 grams phosphorus per kilogram of the polylactide, which overlaps the claimed range.
Yoo et al. does not teach the component (ii). However, Kolstad et al. teaches a similar polylactide resin (abstract) having a catalyst deactivating agent such as a polyacrylic acid/homopolymer of acrylic acid which has a molecular weight of greater than 500 and is used in an amount of 0.01-2 wt% (col. 4 lines 1-25). Polyacrylic acid has one carboxylic acid group per 72 atomic mass units. Yoo et al. and Kolstad et al. are analogous art since they are both concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely polylactide resins. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to add the polyacrylic acid of Kolstad et al. into the composition of Yoo et al. and would have been motivated to do so since Kolstad et al. teaches that it stabilizes the composition (col. 4 lines 10-20).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 2016/0053089) in view of Kolstad et al. (U.S. Pat. 6,114,495) as applied to claim 1 set forth above and in view of Jakupca et al. (US 2013/0345346).
Regarding claim 3: Yoo et al. teaches the basic claimed composition as set forth above. Not disclosed are the polyphosphite ester compounds of structures I and II. However, Jakupca et al. teaches a similar composition comprising structure II (para. 88). Yoo et al. and Jakupca et al. are analogous art since they are both concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely polymer compositions. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to add the polyphosphoric acid of Jakupca et al. into the composition of Yoo et al. and would have been motivated to do so since Jakupca et al. teaches that it is a good stabilizer (para. 6).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Megan McCulley whose telephone number is (571)270-3292. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-5:30.
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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at 571-272-1197. 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.
/MEGAN MCCULLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767
