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
Claims 1-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/28/2026.
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 9, 14, and 19 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 9 recites the limitation "the degradable and recyclable epoxy resin" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the one or more additional materials" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites: “the recycled resin has comparable thermal and mechanical properties as the original resin”. The term "comparable" is a relative term which render the claims indefinite. The term "comparable" are not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not reasonably be apprised of the scope of the invention.
Furthermore, the above recitation leaves the scope of the invention indefinite. It is unclear what the specific properties of the previous polymers were, and what the properties of the claimed polymer are.
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.
Claims 9-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,071,481 to Maters et al. in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2012/0270967 to Burchkardt et al.
As to claims 9 and 12, Maters discloses a low-temperature curable composition comprising an epoxy prepolymer, an amine hardener, minor amounts of solvents (diluent), and curing catalysts (3:45-53) comprising the reaction product of a diepoxide and aromatic hydroxy containing aldehydes such as salicylaldehyde or vanillin (2:49-57) wherein the components are reacted at an epoxy to OH equivalent ratio of 1:0.1 to 1:1.5 resulting in polyaromatic aldehyde group containing components (3:1-14). The equilvalent ratios overlap the claimed ranges, accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would assume a terminal epoxy group and a terminal aldehyde group are present. Maters discloses coating compositions prepared by mixing stoichiometric amounts of polyaromatic aldehyde epoxy prepolymer with the amine components, degassing, and curing the applied coating at temperatures that range from 0 to 120°C (3:62-69, Examples 1-10).
Maters does not expressly disclose an amine curing agent, the amine component in Maters is an imine.
However, within the same field of endeavor, namely low temperature coating compositions, Burckhardt discloses a two component composition comprising K1 that includes an diepoxy resin and an aldehyde and K2 that includes a polyamine component containing primary amines (0076-0082). At the time of filing it would have been obvious to substitute one known curing component for another known curing component in epoxy functional resins. Further, the use the amines allows for a faster reaction with the aldehyde functional groups and a slower curing process for the epoxy resins which allows for a substantially clear, glossy, and nonadhesive film during the curing process (0134). The reaction with the aldehyde component the primary amine groups results in hardly any outgassing of the aldehyde from the curing, or cured composition which has a desirable effect on the emission values as well as on the resistance to abrasion of the cured composition (0149).
As to claim 10, Maters in view of Burckhardt discloses the curing take several days to weeks based on the temperature, reactivity, stoichiometry, and the presence of accelerators.
As to claim 11, Maters discloses wherein the components are mixed at 20°C (Examples 1-10).
As to claims 13-14, Maters in view of Burckhardt disclose the addition of plastic or glass fibers (0109).
As to claim 15, Maters discloses wherein the coating has improved solvent resistance (See Table).
As to claim 20, Maters discloses coatings prepared from the composition (Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-19 and 21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL L LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-7450. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 7:00-4:00.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 571-272-1130. 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 L LEONARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights