Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/699,855

Functional modification of reclaimed rubber materials and use thereof in making safety gloves

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 09, 2024
Priority
Sep 27, 2022 — CN 202211187009.9 +1 more
Examiner
BOYLE, ROBERT C
Art Unit
1764
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Zhejiang Kanglongda Special Protection Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1m
Est. Remaining
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
796 granted / 1142 resolved
+4.7% vs TC avg
Minimal -3% lift
Without
With
+-2.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1177
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
43.4%
+3.4% vs TC avg
§102
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
§112
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1142 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Claim Objections Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: the 11th line states “washing wish ethyl ether” which is a clear typographical error and should read “washing with ethyl ether”. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 4 and 8 recite “diethanolameine” which is a clear typographical error of “diethanolamine”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 2, 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 2 and 4 recite the limitation "the nitrile butadiene latex". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the product" several times. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, it is unclear whether each recitation of ‘the product’ is intended to refer to the same product or the product of the most recent step. Claim 4 recites “the solvent” several times. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is noted that claim 7 refers to the solvent of step (4). Amending the solvent of claim 4 might affect the scope of claim 7. Claim 4 recites the limitation "after reaction" several times. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The steps leading to the statement do not recite a reaction occurs, therefore, there is an antecedent basis issue present. Claims 5-6 recites the limitation "in (step 3)". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 5-6 depends from claim 1 which does not contain a step 3. However, claim 4 recites step 3. Therefore, it is suggested that claims 5-6 be amended to depend from claim 4. Claim 5 recites a molar ratio of 2-aminoethoxy diphosphate and pentaerythritol and 4-(chloromethyl)benzaldehyde is 1:2.2-2.8. However, claim 5 recites three components, (1) of 2-aminoethoxy diphosphate and (2) pentaerythritol and (3) 4-(chloromethyl)benzaldehyde, but the ratio is only with respect to two components 1 : 2.2-2.8. It is unclear whether a third ratio is supposed to be present or whether one of the components is not supposed to be present. Claims 7-8 recites the limitation "in (step 4)". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 7-8 depends from claim 1 which does not contain a step 4. However, claim 4 recites step 4. Therefore, it is suggested that claims 7-8 be amended to depend from claim 4. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 3 are allowed. Claims 2, 4-8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 1 recites a process of mixing 100 pbw NBR, 15-35 pbw reclaimed NBR, hyperbranched NBR-polyurethane, 20-40 pbw dioctyl phthalate, adding to a mill mixer, adding 0.5-1.2 pbw stearic acid, 0.6-1.5 pbw anti-deteriorant, milling and adding 0.5-1 pbw cumyl peroxide, 1-2 pbw triallyl isocyanurate, calendering, winding and sheeting, and vulcanizing. Claims 2-8 depend from claim 1 and thus contain the same limitations. Relevant prior art includes Wang (US 6,251,994) and Pillai (WO 99/48960). Wang teaches a process of forming a vulcanizate which has a damping additive (abstract) where the damping additive is a hyperbranched polymer (col. 6, ln. 19-41) including a hyperbranched polymer formed by reacting a diisocyanate with a OH-polybutadiene (col. 13, ln. 56-60). Wang teaches adding this to 100 pbw butadiene rubber, 1.5 pbw stearic acid (col. 13, ln. 5-25). Wang fails to teach the hyperbranched polymer is derived from a nitrile-butadiene rubber. Wang fails to teach adding triallyl isocyanurate. Wang fails to teach adding an anti-deteriorant. Pillai teaches a process for the manufacture of rubbers using reclaimed rubber (abstract, Table II). Pillai fails to teach using a hyperbranched polymer derived from a nitrile-butadiene rubber.Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT C BOYLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7347. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 10am-4pm. 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, Arrie (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 C BOYLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 09, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12767806
SEMICONDUCTIVE POLYPROPYLENE COMPOSITION
3y 4m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12767818
AQUEOUS BIOPOLYMER DISPERSIONS
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12767759
METHOD FOR PREPARING POLYALKYLENE CARBONATE RESIN
3y 2m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12760171
POLYETHYLENE OR POLYPROPYLENE ARTICLES
1y 6m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12753296
RUBBER COMPOSITION AND CROSSLINKED RUBBER MOLDED PRODUCT
3y 0m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (-2.8%)
2y 8m (~1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1142 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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