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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 11-12 and 14-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected process of using, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/8/2025.
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 1-10 and 13 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 1 recite the limitation “at least one acid modified rubber”. Claims 2-4 then recite the limitation "the acid modified rubber”. Claim 1 recites “at least one acid tackifying resin” and Claim 1 also recites “said acid tackifying resin” and Claim 6 recites “the acid tacking resin”. Claim 9 recites “at least one non-acid tackifying resin” and Claim 10 recites “the non-acid tackifying resin”. The claims 1-4, 6 and 10 are considered indefinite without the “at least one” language preceding the limitation in all dependent claims. The claims should be amended to include “the at least one tackifying resin”, “the at least one acid modified rubber” and “the at least one acid compound”.
Claims 2-10 and 13 are rejected as being dependent on a 112b rejected base claim (claim 1).
Claim 10 is indefinite because it recites “their” in the second to last line. It is unclear what their is referring too. For the purposes of examination , claim 1 will be interpreted as “totally or partially hydrogenated derivatives thereof”.
The phrase “generally resulting” as used in line 4 in claim 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally resulting” has not been defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Applicant’s specification does not define this phrase. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “resulting.”
Claim 10 is indefinite because it recites “comprising a polymer compound, of which the seal consists substantially or entirely”. It is unclear whether the vessel closure seal is comprising or if it consists of the polymer compound. For the purposes of examination , claim 1 will be interpreted as setting forth the vessel closure seal comprises the polymer compound.
Use of parentheses in Claim 10 – e.g. (C5), (C9), and (C5/C9) – renders the scope of the claim indefinite, as it is unclear whether the limitations enclosed in parentheses are optional or required (e.g., do the ingredients require C5 carbons or merely require that C5 hydrocarbon monomers are polymerized but can have other carbon amounts different than C5. For purposed of examination, the claim will be interpreted as either of the above options being acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-10 and 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2018091917 to Koike in view of CN104411796 to Shimamura et al. (as found on the IDS dated 3/6/2024). For the purposes of examination, citations for Koike and Shimamura are taken from a machine translation equivalent of the document.
Regarding Claim 1-8, Koike teaches a hot melt adhesive [title] comprising a thermoplastic block copolymer (A) [abstract] such as styrene-isoprene-styrene (SIS) [0021] thus reading on at least one styrene block copolymer, and (B), an acid modified petroleum resin manufactured by acid modification using unsaturated carboxylic acid [abstract] such as maleic acid [0030] reading on all limitations of tackifiying resin in claims 1 and 6-8.
Koike does not particularly teach an acid modified rubber.
However, Shimamura teaches a hot melt adhesive composition [title] comprising 3-10 parts [0042] (reading on claim 5) of liquid rubber (B) modified with a polar group such as a carboxyl group and/or carboxylic anhydride group [0033] such as LIR-410 produced by Kuraray [0038]. LIR-410 is the same commercial acid modified rubber used in instant specification [0041] thereby reading on the limitations of acid modified rubber in claims 1-4. Koike and Shimamura are analogous art as they are from the same field of endeavor, namely hot melt adhesives comprising styrene block copolymers and tackifiers.
Before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to add Shimamura’s acid modified rubber resin to Koike’s hot melt adhesive, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
The motivation would have been that the acid modified rubber in these amounts contributes wet adhesion and thermal stability [0042] to a hot melt composition.
Regarding Claims 9-10, Koike in view of Shimamura teach the hot melt adhesive composition of claim 1, further comprising an unmodified petroleum resin [0036] such as C5 and C9 petroleum resins [0038] reading on non-acid tackifying resin selected from petroleum hydrocarbon resins of C5/C9 monomers.
Regarding Claims 13, Koike in view of Shimamura teach the hot melt adhesive composition of claim 1, that is used in disposable products such as diapers [0065] reading on article.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to Devin Darling whose telephone number is (703) 756-5411. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00.
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, Arrie Lanee Reuther can be reached on (571) 270-7026. 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.
/DEVIN MITCHELL DARLING/Examiner, Art Unit 1764
/ARRIE L REUTHER/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764