Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/621,275

Aqueous Adhesive Composition

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 29, 2024
Examiner
SALAMON, PETER A
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Seiko Epson Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
702 granted / 816 resolved
+21.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
832
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 816 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1 – 10, in the reply filed on 12/15/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that one search would cover all groups. This is not found persuasive because there is both a search and examination burden for each group. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. 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, 3, 4 and 8 – 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2021081879 A1 to Bai et al. hereinafter “Bai”. Bai is directed to adhesive compositions comprising a polyurethane and a polyacrylate emulsion (1: lines 4 – 5). Regarding claims 1, 3, 4 and 8 – 10, Bai teaches a composition at Table 2, formula IE.5 which comprises 30 % PUD-3 and 70 % PAC-1. PUD-3 is an aqueous polyurethane resin comprising polyester and polyether polyols, a diisocyanate, sodium dodecylbenzene sulphonate (surfactant), EDA (ethylene diamine) and water. The resulting polyurethane polymer (PUD-3) has 61.3 % water. PAC-1 is an aqueous acrylic resin comprising sodium dodecylbenzene sulphonate (surfactant), acrylic monomers, styrene, water, ammonia solution and polypropylene glycol. The resulting acrylic resin is 45 % water. The content of the acrylic resin is greater than the urethane resin. The content of the ammonia (0.7 x 15.5 = 10.85 g) is greater than the content of the amine compound (.3 x 7.9 = 2.37 g). A mixture of 30% PUD-3 and 70% PAC-1 has approximately 49.9% water. As to claims 9 – 10, formula IE.5 does not include solvents or pigments although both are taught as obvious additions to the composition by Bai at least at pages 4 and 10. Claims 9 – 10 were interpreted as the solvent and pigment are optional components. 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) 2 and 5 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2021081879 A1 to Bai et al. hereinafter “Bai”. For the limitations of the independent claim refer to paragraphs 7 – 8 supra. Regarding claim 2, trial IE.5 does not use ammonia and an amine with a standard boiling point of 100C or less. EDA has a boiling point of 116 – 117C. However, Bai teaches that other amines such as triethylamine (TEA) may be used in the formulations (10: 10 – 14). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill to add or substitute TEA for EDA in trail IE.5 as it is directly taught for this use. As to claims 6 – 7, trial IE.5 of Bai is silent as to the claimed ratios of polyurethane resin and acrylic resin. Bai teaches that the ratio by weight of the polyurethane resin to the acrylic resin is from 15: 85 to 85:15 (1: lines 25 – 30). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to pick a ratio, such as 50 : 50, as it is directly taught by Bai. As to claim 5, trial IE.5 of Bai is silent as to the use of said surfactant. Bai teaches the use of anionic surfactants such as ammonium alkyl sulfates (8 – 9: Lines 29 – 2). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill to add or substitute an ammonium alkyl sulfate surfactant in trail IE.5 as it is directly taught for this use. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER A. SALAMON whose telephone number is 571-270-3018. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 6PM. 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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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. PAS 2/6/26 /PETER A SALAMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 29, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600862
PROTEIN POLYURETHANE ALLOYS AND LAYERED MATERIALS INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600855
BIODEGRADATION ACCELERATOR FOR BIODEGRADABLE RESIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600823
Hydrogel Preparation, Method of Forming Same and Method of Coating a Fabric
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595401
ADHESIVE SET, ADHESIVE BODY, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595626
AQUEOUS BIODEGRADABLE-RESIN DISPERSION, PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR, AND FOOD-PACKAGING PAPER OBTAINED USING AQUEOUS BIODEGRADABLE-RESIN DISPERSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+5.9%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 816 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month