DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 6/23/26 has been entered. Currently claims 1-10 and 12-15 are pending, claims 1-4, 9, 10 and 12 are withdrawn.
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 5, 6, 8, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwase (JP 2000038451 which has been machine translated).
As to claims 5, 6, and 13-15 Iwase discloses a molded resin product that comprises 1-30 wt% of a ground product from a waste byproduct (abs) based on the total weight of the resin. The resin can be a biodegradable resin such as poly lactic acid resins, and the waste by-product can be orange peel. As seen in example 2 the composition comprises only orange peel with polymer. However, this reference is silent to the specifics of the claims.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Iwase and used an orange waste product in its entirely with PLA as Iwase discloses the use of waste products such as pulverizing mandarin oranges with biodegradable resins such as PLA. It would have been obvious to use this combination of materials as Iwase discloses overlapping scope of materials.
As to claim 8, Iwase discloses that the resin can have additional materials depending upon the use such as calcium carbonate.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwase (JP 2000038451 which has been machine translated) in view of Oki (US 20210403660).
Iwase renders obvious claim 5 for the reasons noted above, however is silent to the use of polyhydroxybutyrate as the resin.
Oki discloses a molded resin product comprising aliphatic polyester resins such as PLA and polyhydroxybutyrate (paragraph 50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Iwase and used polyhydroxybutyrate as suggested by Oki as Iwase discloses the use of biodegradable aliphatic polyester resins and therefore the use of polyhydroxybutyrate would be a suitable resin as it’s a type of aliphatic polyester resin.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 5 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER M POLLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5734. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8am till 4:30 pm.
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 Ruthkosky can be reached at 5712721291. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M POLLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785
Prosecution Insights