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.
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) 20, 25 – 28, 30 – 33 and 36 – 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170145201 A1 to Boeckmann et al. hereinafter “Boeckman”.
Boeckman is directed to an optimized production process for acrylate rubbers [0001].
Regarding claim 20, 33, 38 and 39, Boeckman teaches the composition of Component A at [0025 – 0035] which comprises 10 – 40% of a graft copolymer A. Graft copolymer A comprises a core of n-butyl or ethyhexyl acrylate crosslinked with a difunctional such as DCPA. The amount of crosslinker is 0.1 to 5% [0027]. The shell comprises a copolymer of styrene or methyl styrene and acrylonitrile [0034]. This is equivalent to component a) in claim 1.
Boeckman teaches the composition of Component C at [0048 – 0056] which comprises 0 – 50% of graft copolymer C of at least one elastomeric crosslinked acrylate polymer C1. Graft copolymer C has an average particle size of 200 – 800nm. Styrene or meth styrene b2) is polymerized with acrylonitrile and ethyl arylate or methyl methacrylate [0056]. From paragraph [0089], butyl acrylate is crosslinked with DCPA and then styrene and acrylonitrile (ACN) [0090]. Calculating the percentage of n-butyl/DCPA in [0089] yield 78.9% (n-butyl/DCPA) and 21.05 % of styrene and styrene/ACN. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to adjust the ration of alkyl (meth)acrylate to styrene, styrene/ACN to achieve the desired properties. This is equivalent to component b) in claim 1.
Boeckman teaches the composition of Component B at [0038 – 0047] which comprises 50 – 90% of one styrene copolymer B. Styrene is copolymerized with acrylonitrile and/or methyl styrene. The polystyrene – acrylonitrile comprises 60 – 85% styrene and 15 – 40% acrylonitrile [0044]. These ranges lie within the claimed ranges for c1) and c2). This is equivalent to component c) in claim 1.
Boeckman teaches the composition of Component D at [0057 – 0068] which comprises 0 – 15 % of the thermoplastic composition and can comprise additives such as UV stabilizers (UV absorbers), antioxidants [0062], pigments and dyes [0067] and carbon black [0068]. The is equivalent to components c) and d) of claim 1.
Boeckman does not teach or suggest the use of homopolymers of MMA in the composition.
Therefore, the thermoplastic composition would be obvious to one of ordinary skill as it is directly taught by Boeckman.
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (The prior art taught carbon monoxide concentrations of "about 1-5%" while the claim was limited to "more than 5%." The court held that "about 1-5%" allowed for concentrations slightly above 5% thus the ranges overlapped.); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Claim reciting thickness of a protective layer as falling within a range of "50 to 100 Angstroms" considered prima facie obvious in view of prior art reference teaching that "for suitable protection, the thickness of the protective layer should be not less than about 10 nm [i.e., 100 Angstroms]." The court stated that "by stating that ‘suitable protection’ is provided if the protective layer is ‘about’ 100 Angstroms thick, [the prior art reference] directly teaches the use of a thickness within [applicant’s] claimed range."). MPEP 2144.05
As to claim 25, the base a1) comprises 78.9% of the core-shell copolymer and the shell a2) comprises 21.05% [0087].
Regarding claim 26, the shell a2) comprises 75% styrene and 25% ACN [0087].
As to claim 27, the graft base a1) comprises 16 parts (97.56%) buty acrylate and 0.4 parts (2.43%) parts DCPA. The amount of a1-2 can be zero therefore it is considered optional. Addressing a1-3), DCPA is a polyfunctional crosslinking monomer used at 2.43%.
Regarding claim 28, the particle size of the graft base A1 is 200 – 800nm [0049].
As to claims 30 – 32, 36, Boeckman teaches the composition of Component D at [0057 – 0068] which comprises 0 – 15 % of the thermoplastic composition and can comprise additives such as UV stabilizers (UV absorbers), antioxidants [0062], pigments and dyes (colorants) [0067] and carbon black (colorant) [0068].
Regarding claim 37, Boeckman teaches the formation of molding, films or coatings of the thermoplastic composition [0019].
Prior Art of Record
US 20170145201 A1 to Boeckman et al.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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 9/4/26
/PETER A SALAMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights