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 .
Election/Restrictions
Restriction is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372.
This application contains the following inventions or groups of inventions which are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1.
In accordance with 37 CFR 1.499, applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single invention to which the claims must be restricted.
Group I, claim(s) 1-14 and 20, drawn to a surface covering comprising a PVC-based layer, and a barrier layer directly adjacent to the PVC-based layer, comprising PVOH and a polyisocyanate derivative.
Group II, claim(s) 15-19, drawn to a method of making a surface covering comprising a PVC-based layer, and a barrier layer directly adjacent to the PVC-based layer, comprising PVOH and a polyisocyanate derivative.
The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons:
Groups I and II lack unity of invention because the groups do not share the same or corresponding technical feature for the reasons set forth in paragraph 9 below.
During a telephone conversation with Dan Drexler on 3/23/2026, a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims1-14 and 20. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 15-19 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 4/25/2024 has been fully considered. An initialed copy of said IDS is enclosed herein.
Drawings
The drawings filed 4/25/2024 are accepted.
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) 1-11, 13, 14, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siche (US 2012/0114931) in view of Baum (US 3,382,215).
Siche teaches a laminate comprising a PVC layer including inorganic filler coated with a barrier layer including PVOH (abstract).
Siche teaches adhesion between the PVOH and the PVC is a problem, but does not teach the PVOH should comprise polyvinyl alcohol and a polyisocyanate derivative obtained through reaction of a polyisocyanate with hydroxyl groups of the polyvinyl alcohol. However, Baum teaches reacting olefin polymer with organic polyisocyanates (abstract). Specifically, Baum teaches hydroxyl containing olefin polymer may be reacted with polyisocyantes provides marked adhesional improvements (col 2, lines 42+). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to react the hydroxyl groups of the PVOH layer taught in Siche with an organic polyisocyanate. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase adhesion between the PVC and the polyvinyl chloride layers.
With regards to claim 2, Baum teaches the polyisocyanate derivative is a crosslinker of polyvinyl alcohol (col 2, lines 48+).
With regards to claim 3, Siche teaches the PVC based layer may comprise inorganic filler (abstract).
With regards to claim 4, the PVOH of Siche is understood to be fully saponified since it is taught to be PVOH. Alternatively, the Elvanol 71-30 and 90-50 (0045) product disclosed in Siche are known to be fully saponified.
With regards to claims 5-7, Baum teaches the polyisocyanate derivative comprises a derivative of at least one of: toluene diisocyanate, methylene diphenyl diisocyanate, and p-phenylene
diisocyanate and methylene dicyclohexyl diisocyanate (col 5, liners 25+). Said species are understood to read on the structures of claims 5 and 6.
With regards to claims 8-10, Siche teaches the surface covering (title) comprises a floor covering (0022) or wall covering (0036).
With regards 11, Siche teaches the PVC-based layer may comprise recycled PVC (0004), herein understood to read up to 100% of the overall PVC content. Otherwise, said limitation is understood to be a method limitation and does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention as recycled PVC is compositionally identical to virgin PVC.
With regards to claim 13, Baum teaches the polyisocyanate derivative may be used in virtually any concentration in the composition (col 7, lines 23+). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to optimize the amount of polyisocyanate utilized in the PVOH layer in order to optimize the properties of the resulting composition, including the adhesion thereof.
With regards to claim 14, Siche in view Baum teaches a surface covering comprising at least one of a floor covering and a wall covering (see claims 8-10 above), wherein the polyvinyl alcohol has a degree of hydrolysis of not less than 98 mol% (claim 4 above), and wherein the polyisocyanate derivative is obtained through reaction of a polyisocyanate having an isocyanate functionality in
the range from 2.5 to 6 with hydroxyl groups of the polyvinyl alcohol (claim 13 above).
With regards to claim 20, Siche teaches a laminate comprising a PVC layer including inorganic filler coated with a barrier layer including PVOH (abstract). Siche teaches adhesion between the PVOH and the PVC is a problem, but does not teach the PVOH should comprise polyvinyl alcohol and a polyisocyanate derivative obtained through reaction of a polyisocyanate with hydroxyl groups of the polyvinyl alcohol. However, Baum teaches reacting olefin polymer with organic polyisocyanates (abstract0> Specifically, Baum teaches hydroxyl containing olefin polymer may be reacted with polyisocyanate provides marked adhesional improvements (col 2, lines 42+). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to react the hydroxyl groups of the PVOH layer taught in Siche with an organic polyisocyanate. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase adhesion between the PVC and the polyvinyl chloride layers. Baum teaches the polyisocyanate derivative is a crosslinker of polyvinyl alcohol (col 2, lines 48+). Baum teaches he polyisocyanate derivative comprises a derivative of at least one of: toluene diisocyanate, methylene diphenyl diisocyanate, and p-phenylene diisocyanate and methylene dicyclohexyl diisocyanate (col 5, liners 25+). Said species are understood to read on the structures of claims 20.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siche (US 2012/0114931) in view of Baum (US 3,382,215), as applied to claims 1-11, 13, 14, and 20 above, and further in view of Xue et al (US 2024/0043707)
Siche in view of Baum is relied upon as above, but does not teach the PVC-based layer may comprise a functionalization with hydroxyl groups. However, Xue teaches vinyl chloride polymers may be functionalized with hydroxyl groups in order to improve solubility of the polymer (0009). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to functionalize the PVC of Siche with hydroxyl groups in order to control the solubility and processing thereof.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Blemberg (US 5,108,844) teaches adjacent layers may be blended to improve adhesion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN R KRUER whose telephone number is (571)272-1510. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at (571) 272-1123. 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.
/KEVIN R KRUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787