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 .
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 2, 6, 11, and 20 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 claims 2, 6, 11, and 20, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For purposes of examination, the limitations following the phrase are not considered part of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-10, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Vilaplana Artigas et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0107981). Regarding Claim 1, Vilaplana Artigas et al., hereafter “Vilaplana Artigas,” show that it is known to carry out a method for the chemical recycling of polyethylene furanoate (PEF), wherein a PEF polymer is converted into at least one low-molecular compound (Abstract; 0006, 0048).
Regarding Claim 2, Vilaplana Artigas shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the PEF polymer is converted into at least one oligomer as the low-molecular compound (Abstract; 0006).
Regarding Claim 3, Vilaplana Artigas shows the method of claim 1, including one wherein the conversion of the PEF polymer into the low-molecular compound is carried out by means of a solvolysis (0030).
Regarding Claim 4, Vilaplana Artigas shows the method of claim 3 above, including one wherein the solvolysis is a glycolysis (0030).
Regarding Claim 5, Vilaplana Artigas shows the method of claim 4 above, including one wherein the glycolysis is carried out at a temperature between 100°C and 300°C (0051).
Regarding Claim 6, Vilaplana Artigas shows the method of claim 4 above, including one wherein the low-molecular compound is converted into a recycling polyol by transesterification in the presence of at least one polyhydric alcohol (0030, 0069).
Regarding Claim 9, Vilaplana Artigas shows the method of claim 6 above, including one wherein at least one catalyst is used for transesterification (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 10, Vilaplana Artigas shows a recycling polyol obtainable by claim 6 (0066).
Regarding Claim 12, Vilplana Artigas shows a PUR/PIR hard foam manufactured from at least one polyol, wherein the polyol is at least partly a recycling polyol which is recycled from polyethylene furanoate (PEF) (0066).
Regarding Claim 13, VIlplana Artigas show the foam of claim 12, including one wherein the polyol is predominantly a recycling polyol which is recycled from polyethylene furanoate (PEF) (0066).
Regarding Claim 14, Vilplana Artigas shows the foam of claim 12, including one wherein the polyol is at least partly a recycling polyol which is recycled from polyethylene furanoate (PEF), and at least partly a polyol which is manufactured predominantly from sustainable raw materials (0048, 0066, 0072).
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.
Claim(s) 7, and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vilaplana Artigas. Vitaplana Artigas shows the method of claim 6 and article of claim 12 above, but he does not show the specific property values. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to carry out the method so that the product has any appropriate property values, such as those claimed, because where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed by the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A)).
Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vilaplana Artigas, in view of Tabor et al. (U.S. Patent 9,850,400). Vilplana Artigas shows the process for manufacturing foams including one which teaches a polyol recycled from PEF (Abstract; 0006, 0048), wherein at least one polyisocyanate, at least one recycling polyol, and at least one foaming agent are converted into a PUR/PIR hard foam (Column 3, lines 12-21; Column 8, lines 62-67; Column 9, lines 1-11; Column 18, lines 8-40). It would have been obvious to create Tabor’s hard foam with Vilplana Artigas’ polyol from PEF because functional equivalency of PEF and PET is art recognized (Vilaplana Artigas) (MPEP 2144.07).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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.
Claim 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 MONICA HUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
MONICA ANNE HUSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/MONICA A HUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights