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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 18 December 2023 and 28 April 2025 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
1. Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2010/0294988 to Stueven et al. (“Stueven”).
With regard to Claims 1-2, Stueven teaches a method for producing water-absorbent resin particles comprising forming a coating layer on a surface of water-absorbent polymer particles, heat-treating the coated particles at a temperature i) higher than a glass transition temperature of a polymer component of which the coating is comprised; and ii) sufficiently low so as to yield a weight-loss of less than 10% (see Abstract; ¶¶ [0017], [0024], [0123]; Examples 2 and 5 at ¶¶ [0151]-[0153] and ¶¶ [0158]-[0159], respectively). To wit, in each of Examples 2 and 5, the coating material is an aqueous polymer featuring a glass transition temperature of 3°C (see ¶ [0151]). Heat treatment is conducted at 130°C, rendering a water content of 0.1% by weight less than heat-treated uncoated polymer particles (compare ¶¶ [0149] and [0153]).
Stueven teaches usage of film-forming polymer in coating compositions wherein the polymer features elongation properties resistant to breaking (see ¶¶ [0035], [0123]). Although Stueven does not expressly remark upon the resulting absolute value of change in elongation rate of the coating polymer component before and after heat treatment, the claimed feature is understood to be inherent within the Stueven’s disclosed process since the reference conducts the process steps as claimed using the claimed parameters, particularly in view of Stueven’s instruction to employ break-resistant coatings.
With regard to Claims 3-4, Stueven teaches coating material comprising an aqueous polymer comprising a copolymer of alkyl methacrylate and methacrylic acid units (see ¶¶ [0045], [0151]). Stueven also teaches coating compositions comprising polyalkylene glycol, polyolefins, and polymer mixtures (see ¶¶ [0019], [0035]-[0046], [0058]-[0061]).
With regard to Claim 6, Stueven teaches ratios of coating material to polymer particles at amounts within the claimed range (see Examples 2 and 5 at ¶¶ [0151]-[0152] and [0158]-[0159], respectively).
With regard to Claim 7, Stueven teaches concentrations of coating material in a coating liquid at amounts within the claimed range (see Examples 2 and 5 at ¶¶ [0151]-[0152] and [0158]-[0159], respectively).
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.
2. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stueven, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of US 2008/0124551 to Daniel et al. (“Daniel”).
With regard to Claim 5, Stueven teaches usage of film-forming polymer coating materials (see ¶¶ [0035], [0050]-[0057], [0123]). To the extent that the reference’s disclosed dropping point temperatures do not contemplate claimed glass transition temperatures of polymer components, Daniel is similarly directed to a process for producing water-absorbing materials via coating particles with an elastic film-forming polymer and subsequently heat-treating the coated particles, and teaches the glass transition temperature of the polymer coating component governs the duration of heat treatment (see Abstract; ¶ [0257]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have employed a polymer component featuring a glass transition temperature within the claimed range in the method of Stueven throughout the course of routine experimentation and optimization in pursuit of a desired heat-treatment duration as taught by Daniel.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael P Rodriguez whose telephone number is (571)270-3736. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:00 Eastern M-F.
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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/Michael P. Rodriguez/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712