DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This application is a national stage entry under 35 U.S.C. §371 of International Application No. PCT/US2022/037133 filed 7/14/2022.
Acknowledgment is made of Provisional application No. 63/238,446, filed on Aug. 30, 2021.
Claims 1, 3-9, 12-23 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 17 recites Any one preceding claim, which appears to be inadvertent.
Claim 23 recites …R1 and R2 are H, n is 1, and R3 is ethyl [2-(ethyloxycarbonyl)cyclopentanone, CPEE]… which appears to be redundant since formula I is defined by the structure recited in claim 23.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 3-9, 12-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gurtler et al. (US 2007/0083028).
Regarding claim 1: Gurtler is directed to a two component polyurethane adhesive composition comprising:
Component A comprising a polyurethane prepolymer made by reacting at least one polyisocyanate and at least one polyol resulting in Intermediate I followed by reaction with a molecule of
PNG
media_image1.png
138
113
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, including cyclopentanone-
2-carboxymethyl ester and -carboxyethyl ester as well as cyclohexanone-2-carboxymethyl ester (equivalent to formula I of the present invention wherein R1=R2= H R3=methyl and n is 1 or 2, respectively ([0045]).
One or more polyols optionally in the presence of a catalyst, wherein an optional catalyst capable of catalyzing the reaction of amine, e.g. zinc carboxylate or zinc 2-ethylhexanoate ([0052])
A further blocking agent includes polyamimes of triazole, imidazoles, pyrazoles ([0048]).
At least one of component A or component B comprises a catalyst capable of catalyzing the reaction of an amine resulting from the molecule of formula I. Specifically, the polyol component comprises one or more polyols optionally in the presence of a catalyst, wherein an optional catalyst capable of catalyzing the reaction of amine, e.g. zinc carboxylate or zinc 2-ethylhexanoate ([0052]).
The free NCO groups of the blocked prepolymer is preferably <0.1 wt% (equivalent to component A has an NCO content of less than 0.1 wt% determined according to ASTM D2572-97) ([0053]).
While a specific two component adhesive composition comprising claimed components A and B in a single composition is not mentioned, it would have been obvious to have selected such a composition since the CH acidic cyclic ketone and a second blocking agent comprising a polyamine are taught as suitable. Further, Gurtler discloses finite number of identified, predictable options and one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to have included claimed components A and B in a single adhesive composition to arrive at claim 1 of the present invention.
Regarding claim 3: Polyols disclosed include polyether polyols, polyester poIyols including polycaprolactone, polybutadiene diols, polycarbonate diols, aliphatic diols
and mixtures of any of these. ([0038])
Regarding claims 4-6: The polyol is preferably triols or tetra-ol or a mixture of a triol and a diol, with triols being particularly preferred ([0039]).
Regarding claim 7: Polyether polyols are well-known in the art and include, for example, polyoxyethylene, polyoxypropylene, polyoxybutylene, and polytetramethylene
ether dials and trials ([0040]).
Regarding claims 8-9: The polyol preferably comprises propylene oxide based diol or triol ([0044]).
Regarding claims 12-14: Examples of suitable diisocyanates include toluene diisocyanate (TDI), hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI), naphthalene diisocyanate (NDI), methylene bis-cyclohexylisocyanate (HMDI) (hydrogenated MDI), MDI (in particular 4,4'- and 4,2-MDI) and isophorone diisocyanate (IPDI), with HDI being particularly preferred. ([0047]).
Regarding claim 15: The polyisocyanate us used in excess of at least 1.2 eq or greater in the working examples ([0127]).
Regarding claims 16-23: Component A comprising a polyurethane prepolymer made by reacting at least one polyisocyanate and at least one polyol resulting in Intermediate I followed by reaction with a molecule of
PNG
media_image1.png
138
113
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, including cyclopentanone-2-carboxymethyl ester and -carboxyethyl ester as well as cyclohexanone-2-carboxymethyl ester (equivalent to formula I of the present invention wherein R1=R2= H R3=methyl and ethyl and n is 1 or 2, respectively ([0045]).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT T BUTCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3514. The examiner can normally be reached Telework M-F 9-5 Pacific Time Zone.
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, Lanee Reuther can be reached at (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.
/ROBERT T BUTCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Prosecution Insights