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/JP2022/029529 filed 8/1/2022.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(a)-(d) by Application No. JP 2021138148 filed 4/26/2021, which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Claims 1-11 are pending.
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 1-9, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kodemura et al. (US 2019/0010271).
Regarding claim 1: Kodemura is directed to a latex composition comprising a synthetic polyisoprene (equivalent to an ion polymerized conjugated diene as defined by the present invention) and/or a carboxyl containing styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer made by emulsifying a solution of water, solvent and surfactants ([0074]) (equivalent to an emulsion polymerized conjugated diene polymer latex). Specifically, the synthetic polyisoprene is made by polymerization of isoprene with other ethylenically unsaturated copolymerizable monomers using a Ziegler polymerization catalyst in an organic solvent ([0023]) which is defined by the present invention as an ion polymerized conjugated diene polymer.
While a specific latex composition simultaneously comprising both the synthetic polyisoprene and carboxyl containing styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer in a single composition, Kodemura teaches the composition can comprise carboxyl
group-containing synthetic polyisoprene and a carboxyl group-containing styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer (SIS) (abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to have selected carboxyl group-containing synthetic polyisoprene and a carboxyl group-containing styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer (SIS), since Kodemura discloses a 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.
Regarding claim 2: Relative amounts of the diene polymer (A) and emulsion polymerized diene polymer (B) are not specifically mentioned when both (A) and (B) are selected. However, case law holds that “discovery of an optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art.” See MPEP 2144.05(II).
In the present case, Kodemura teaches the content of carboxyl group modification, and the resulting amount of SIS polymer allows the dip molded product to have an appropriate hardness and improve mechanical stability of the latex, improving tensile strength and tear strength of the dip molded product ([0095]). In other words, one skilled in the art would have been motivated to optimized the amount of diene polymer (B) within the scope of the claims the amount of SIS polymer produces a dip molded product with appropriate hardness and improve mechanical stability of the latex, improving tensile strength and tear strength.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to have included an amount of carboxyl group SIS polymer relative to 100 parts ion polymerized conjugated diene polymer (A) within the scope of the claims.
Regarding claim 3: The content of the carboxyl group relative to polyisoprene conjugated diene units is preferably 0.5-6 wt%, wherein unsaturated carboxylic acids of methacrylic acid and itaconic acid are disclosed ([0047] [0095]). The relative amounts of styrene to isoprene is preferably 5:95 to 50:50 ([0090]), and therefore a copolymer of styrene to polyisoprene of 5:95 and carboxyl group relative to polyisoprene conjugated diene units is preferably 0.5-6 wt% results in an amount of conjugated diene monomer units and ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer units within the scope of claim 3.
Regarding claim 4: The ion polymerized conjugated diene polymer is a polyisoprene polymer.
Regarding claim 5: The ion polymerized conjugated diene polymer is a carboxylic acid modified product obtained by proceeding a carboxylic acid modification in an aqueous phase (abstract).
Regarding claim 6: Example 1 comprises 98% cis bonds ([0145]).
Regarding claim 7: Kodemura doesn’t mention any specific cis content of the SIS copolymer. However, Kodemura teaches the cis content of the synthetic polyisoprene is preferably 70-90 wt% ([0025]). One skilled in the art would be motivated to have selected this amount of cis content in the emulsion polymerized conjugated diene as well, since the polyisoprene block copolymer comprises a polyisoprene block and Kodemura teaches a cis content including 70 wt% results in improved tensile strength ([0025]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to have selected a cis content within the scope of claim 7.
Regarding claim 8: A sulfur based vulcanization agent is disclosed.
Regarding claim 9: A vulcanization accelerator is disclosed.
Regarding claim 11: A dip molded article is disclosed.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kodemura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Aihara et al. (US 2020/0056019).
Regarding claim 10: Kodemura doesn’t mention a xanthogen compound.
Aihara is directed a latex composition comprising a carboxy modified conjugated diene polymer latex and an xanthogen compound. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to have selected the xanthogen compound in Kodemura since when combined with the latex and metal oxide results in excellent stability, aggregates are suppressed, showed good results of delayed allergy and excellent tensile strength and tensile elongation ([0211] Aihara).
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