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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 3/8/2024 has been entered. Claims 1-35 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 3/8/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. Only the abstract have been provided for the foreign patent documents B1-B19. The full copy of the original foreign patent document needs to be provided. Additionally, “Other Art” C2 lists ASTM 1928-16. However, ASTM D4703-16 is what is filed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8, 12-14, 18-19, 22, 25, 28-30 and 33-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN 112778376 A, See machine translation for citation) in view of Wang (US 2020/0017666 A1) as evidenced by Baier “Post-Metallocenes in the Industrial Production of Polyolefins”, Angew. Chem. Int. ed., 2014, 53, 9722-9744.
Regarding claims 1-3, 8, 12-13, 18-19, 22, 28-29, 33, and 35, Li discloses a polymerization process comprising polymerizing ethylene optionally with one or more than one C3-C12 alpha-olefin (olefin copolymerization reaction (Abstract); copolymerization of ethylene and 1-butylenes, 1-octene; Contents of Invention). The polymerization includes a metallocene compound having formula I:
PNG
media_image1.png
208
262
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in the formula I, R1 (R12B of the instant claims) is selected from alkyl or aryl;
R2 (R10B of the instant claims) is selected from alkyl or phenyl;
R3 (R13B of the instant claims) is selected from alkyl or aryl;
X is selected from halogen or alkyl (activatable ligand);
M is a transition metal including titanium from a short list;
R14B is methyl;
all of the other atoms attached to the rings are hydrogen.
Preferably R1= methyl, R2 = methyl, R3= phenyl, M-Ti, X= Cl; or
R1= tertiary butyl, R2=methyl, R3=phenyl, M=Ti, X=Cl; or
R1=adamantly, R2=methyl, R3=phenyl, M=Ti, X=Cl among others.
The catalyst may also contain alkyl aluminoxane and boron-containing material.
However, Li does not disclose a hindered phenol compound. Wang teaches a hindered phenol, such as 2,6-di-tertiarybutyl-4-ethyl phenol [0079, 0086]. Li and Wang are analogous art concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely olefin polymerization using a transition metal catalyst. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention add a hindered phenol compound as per the teachings of Wang, and the motivation to do so would have been as Wang suggests producing an active single site catalyst [0087]. Per the teachings of Baier, a similar compound enhances the productivity of the catalytic system (1st full paragraph, p. 9725).
Regarding claim 4, the polymerization is carried out in n-hexane.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Li discloses a batch process. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make the process continuous including stirring in order to produce more polymer quickly. In re Dilnot, 319 F.2d 188, 138 USPQ 248 (CCPA 1963) (Claim directed to a method of producing a cementitious structure wherein a stable air foam is introduced into a slurry of cementitious material differed from the prior art only in requiring the addition of the foam to be continuous. The court held the claimed continuous operation would have been obvious in light of the batch process of the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04 (V) (E).
Regarding claim 7, Li discloses the polymerization temperature is 140℃ as shown in Examples 25-40.
However, Li does not disclose the polymerization process is carried out at a temperature f at least 160℃. As the rate of polymerization is variable that can be modified by adjusting said temperature, the precise temperature would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, temperature, and the motivation to do so would have been to obtain desired rate of polymerization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 14, Li discloses R2 (R10B) is selected from methyl (Contents of Invention).
Regarding claims 20-21, Li discloses R1 (R12B) includes tert-butyl or adamantly (Contents of Invention).
Regarding claim 24, Li discloses R3 (R13B) includes methyl (Contents of Invention).
Regarding claims 25 and 30, although Li does not disclose R13B is n-pentyl or R14B is an ethyl group, compounds which are position isomers (compounds having the same radicals in physically different positions on the same nucleus) or homologs (compounds differing regularly by the successive addition of the same chemical group, e.g., by -CH2- groups) are generally of sufficiently close structural similarity that there is a presumed expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. In re Wilder, 563 F.2d 457, 195 USPQ 426 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2144.09 (II).
Regarding claim 34, Li discloses the boron-based catalyst includes Ph3C [B (C6H5)4] or [PhNH (CH3)2] [B (C6F5)4] (Specific implementation examples).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11, 15-17, 26-27 and 31-32 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 9-11, the closest prior art of record, Li discloses R3B is hydrogen R14B is hydrogen. There is no teaching or suggestion to substitute the hydrogen groups.
Regarding claims 15-17, R2 (R10B) is alkyl or phenyl and does not teaches an heteroatom containing hydrocarbyl group or alkoxy group.
Regarding claims 26-27, Li discloses R3 (R13B) is aryl or alkyl with preferred R3 being methyl, phenyl, or benzyl (Contents of Invention).
Regarding claims 31-32, Li discloses R14B is methyl. Therefore, Li does not teach or suggest R14B is an aryl group.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Li (CN 112876519 A) discloses a metallocene compound of bridged nitrogen- or phosphorous- containing heterocyclic structure.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3879. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Srilakshmi K Kumar can be reached at (571)272-7769. 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.
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights