DETAILED ACTION
Claims 5 to 8 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.
The unit of measurement for the total capacity value in (A) and (B) is undefined.
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 1 to 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/122215, as interpreted by the English language equivalent PGPub 2022/0015959 to Yabuguchi.
For process claims 1 to 4, note the following.
Yabuguchi teaches a method for producing a water absorbent resin by reverse
phase suspension polymerization of ethylenically unsaturated monomers. This occurs in a hydrocarbon dispersion medium.
Paragraphs 32 to 37 teach this method including the monomers, the dispersion medium, reverse phase suspension and the content of acrylic acid in both the aqueous solution and the monomer total. Each claimed limitation for these aspects are found in these paragraphs of Yabuguchi. Paragraph 46 and on teaches a polymerization initiator including azo and peroxide compounds, and teaches that they can be used in combina-tion. Paragraph 51 and 52 teach an internal crosslinking agent. In addition to the above, see paragraphs 104 to 110 and the working examples which show a method such as claimed. The working examples use a combination of an azo and persulfate initiator.
Thus the teachings in Yabuguchi and the working examples differ from the claims in that they do not teach an initiator containing both an azo compound and a peroxide or the specific molar ratio of crosslinking agent/azo compound.
With regard to this first difference, as noted supra, Yabuguchi teach in paragraph 46 that azo compounds and peroxides are both useful and that initiators can be used in combination. As such one having ordinary skill in the art would have found the combin-ation of such initiators to have been an obvious embodiment of Yabuguchi. For instance it would have been obvious to use a peroxide rather than a persulfate initiator in the methods in the working examples with the expectation of obtaining predictable and use-ful results.
With regard to the second difference, see the teaching in paragraph 61 which refers to the amount of crosslinking agent per ethylenically unsaturated monomer and paragraph 47 which refers to the amount of initiator per ethylenically unsaturated mono-mer such that the skilled artisan the ratio of crosslinker to azo compound is something that can indirectly be optimized in an effort to obtain a beneficial and useful product. Note that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discover-ing the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
In this manner each of the limitations in claim 1 are rendered obvious.
For claim 2, note that adjusting the ratio of these two initiators in an effort to control the reaction rate would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art particularly since the skilled artisan would recognize that they initiate polymerization at different temperatures and thus allow for optimizing and/or adjusting reaction stages.
For claim 3, see the ratio of crosslinking agent to unsaturated monomer as found in paragraph 61 as it meets this limitation.
For claim 4, the Examiner notes that each of these specific properties are not dis-closed by Yabuguchi though the teachings therein are concerned with improved water absorbency, saline retention and DW (demand wettability). See Table 1 among other sections. Yabuguchi also teaches ways in which these properties can be adjusted. See for instance paragraph 36 (refers to enhancing water absorption capacity), paragraph 59 (refers to improved water absorption) and paragraphs 61 and 67 to 70 (refers to surface crosslinking to control water absorption).
Given the fact that Yabuguchi teaches various means for adjusting and optimiz-ing various water absorption properties one having ordinary skill in the art would have found a process in which the final product has these properties to have been obvious and well within routine experimentation.
For the resin claims 5 to 8, note the following.
Yabuguchi teaches a water absorbent resin that is a crosslinked product of a polymer prepared from water soluble monomers having an acrylic acid and salt content within the claimed range. See the last sentence in paragraph 35.
As noted supra, this reference does not specifically teach the properties as claim-ed though it tests several properties that are very similar such that it follows that saline retention and water absorption capacity were important considerations for Yabuguchi. For instance Table 1 tests the value non-pressurized DW after 1 minute rather than the claimed 5 minutes.
As noted above for claim 4, Yabuguchi teaches various means by which these properties can be adjusting, modified and/or optimized. Given this fact one having ordinary skill in the art would have found a process in which the final product has these properties to have been obvious and well within routine experimentation. In this manner the resin of claims 5 and 6 is rendered obvious.
For claims 7 and 8, see paragraph 75.
The remaining references cited in the attached PTO-892 are cited as being of general interest.
5,624,967 teaches in col. 7, lines 23 to 32, that a combination of various initiators including hydrogen peroxide and an azo compound results in a water absorbing resin having a small water soluble content. This indicates that adjusting combinations of initiators is a known means of adjusting water absorbent properties.
2022/0064347 teaches in paragraph 30 that peroxides and azos have different initiation temperatures such that combinations thereof are used to adjust crosslinking time and resulting properties. This too associates a combination of initiators with water absorption.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARGARET MOORE whose telephone number is (571)272-1090. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday, 10 am to 5 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Heidi Kelly, can be reached at 571-270-1831.
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 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.
Mgm
7/20/26
/MARGARET G MOORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
Prosecution Insights