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 1-11 and 14 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 claim 1, the claim recites “a stabilized organic material”. The limiting effect of the recitation is unclear. Components ii and iii are understood to be stabilizers in the context of the instant application. It is not clear whether the “stabilized organic material” is a material that has been pre-stabilized prior to being included in the claimed composition (e.g. components ii and iii provide further stabilization to an already stabilized material) or whether the stabilization recited in the claim is the stabilization provided by components ii and iii. Appropriate correction and clarification is required. Further claims 2-4 recite the stabilized material includes certain polymers. It is not clear whether the polymers by themselves are sufficient to read upon the claimed “stabilized organic material” or whether the polymers need additional stabilization beyond components ii and iii. Even further, in view of the breadth of “organic material”, it is not clear what would or would not reasonably be understood to be a “stabilized” organic material. For example, it is not clear whether intrinsically stable materials are within the scope of the claim or what is necessarily required for something to be considered stabilized in the broader context. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
As to claim 4, the claim recites “the polyvinylchloride”. The recitation lacks antecedent basis in the claims. Appropriate correction is required.
As to claim 5, the claim recites “the stabilized organic material comprises at least one plasticizer, at least one heat stabilizer, and mixtures thereof”. As recited, it appears that a plasticizer, a heat stabilizer and a mixture of a plasticizer and a heat stabilizer is required. It is not clear whether this is the intended scope or whether a Markush limitation is intended. Further, it is not clear whether the presence of both a plasticizer and a heat stabilizer necessarily reads upon a mixture or whether a third distinct component is required or intended. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
As to claim 9, the claim includes a period after “(A-5)” at line 3. However, this does not appear to be the end of the claim. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
The other claims are rejected as dependent claims.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Braig et al. (WO 2004/031294).
Regarding claims 1, 8, 9, 12, 14 and 15, Braig et al. teach a composition comprising a stabilized organic material (Abstract; pages 1-10), at least one compound as set forth in formula (A) (A1-A16), and at least one UV absorber (page 1, page 10, pages 21-24). The additives i) and ii) are added to a stabilized organic material (e.g. thermoplastic polymers – page 59) to further stabilize the material. (Also see the Examples and claims 1-17).
As to claims 2-4, Braig et al. teach polymers as claimed (page 59).
As to claims 5-7, Braig et al. teach plasticizers and heat stabilizers as claimed (pages 16-27)
As to claim 10, Braig et al. teach the UV absorber as claimed (claims 1-17).
As to claims 11 and 13, teach the materials in ratios as claimed (pages 81-83)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Herbst et al. (US 2008/0194731), Ishima et al. (US 2018/0042217), Mitamura et al. (US 2018/0030243) and Ishima et al. (US 2017/0327475) are understood to disclose applicable mixtures and compositions and should be considered prior to replying to this Office Action.
Additionally, the teachings of WO 2005/047384, WO 03/060001, WO 2018/177846, WO 2011/020760 and WO 2005/103345 as set forth in the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority should be considered prior to replying to this Office Action as they are also understood by the examiner to be applicable.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeff Wollschlager whose telephone number is (571)272-8937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:30.
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.
/JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights