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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 7/03/2025 has been considered by the Examiner.
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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation of less than or equal to 100 psi, and the claim also recites less than 600 psi and less than 300 psi which are the narrower statement of the range/limitation. Claims 2-11 are rejected for depending from indefinite claim 1. Appropriate action is required.
Additionally, claim 9 recites the broad recitation of at least 70%, and the claim also recites preferably 80% and more preferably greater than 90% which are narrower statements of the range/limitation.
The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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 1-4 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakatani et al., US 2013/0303651 (“Nakatani”) in view of Stapf et al., EP 3,835,378 (“Stapf”)(copy provided herewith).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Nakatani discloses a curable sealing material comprising an oligomeric component (A), a (meth)acrylate component (B), and a polythiol compound (C) [abstract, 00002, 0017].
The oligomeric component (A) may be a conjugated diene polymer-type (meth)acrylate oligomer such as polybutadiene oligomer [0033]. The conjugated diene polymer-type (meth)acrylate oligomer such as polybutadiene oligomer may be a polyisoprene diacrylate obtained by esterifying polyisoprene with acrylic acid [0040]. The (meth)acrylate component (B) may be, inter alia, a polyethylene glycol diacrylate [0047, 0049]. As the polythiol compound (C), Nakatani discloses, inter alia, pentaerythritol tetrakis(2-mercaptoproprionate) [0067]. The pentaerythritol tetrakis(2-mercaptoproprionate) of the polythiol compound of the material disclosed by Nakatani corresponds to the claimed thiol compound. The polyisoprene diacrylate taught by Nakatani as being suitable as the oligomeric component (A) corresponds to the claimed (meth)acrylate functional polymer including one or more polyolefin segment. The polyethylene glycol diacrylate taught by Nakatani as being suitable as the (meth)acrylate component (B) corresponds to the claimed reactive diluent.
Nakatani is silent regarding the composition being a two component composition. Stepf discloses a two-part curable composition comprising a first part containing a resin component and a reactive monomer, and a second part containing a curing agent [abstract, 0001, 0010, 0140]. Stepf teaches that the different components of the composition are contained in the appropriate part of the two-part composition in order to ensure storage stability [0127].
Nakatani and Stepf are both directed towards curable compositions comprising a resin component, a reactive monomer, and a curing agent. In light of the teachings of Stepf it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was effectively filed to have made the curable sealant material of Nakatani so as to have a first part comprising the oligomeric component (A) and a (meth)acrylate component (B) a first part and the polythiol compound (C) as the second part in order to ensure stage stability. The two-parts of the material of modified Nakatani would have respectively corresponded to the claimed (meth)acrylate part and thiol part.
Nakatani is silent regarding cured reaction products of the disclosed curable material having an adhesion strength of less than or equal to 1,000 psi as recited in claim 1. Nakatani is also silent regarding the gel time, and/or surface tack free time, and/or room temperature cure time as recited in claim 10.
However, it is noted that the teachings of Nakatani encompass a material which is identical to or substantially identical to the material claimed and disclosed by Applicant. For example, Applicant’s specification states that in one embodiment the (meth)acrylate functional polymer comprises repeating polyisoprene segments and the (meth)acrylate functional group joined to the polymer by an ester linking group [037] which is the polyisoprene diacrylate taught by Nakatani for component (A) is. Further, the instant specification also discloses that the (meth)acrylate functional part includes one or more polyolefin segments which may be polyisoprene [037] which the polyisoprene diacrylate taught by Nakatani for component (A) is.
Further, Applicant specification discloses that the reactive diluent may be polyethylene glycol diacrylate or dipropylene glycol diacrylate [0039] which are taught by Nakatani as being suitable as the (meth)acrylate monomer component. Nakatani also teaches that the (meth)acrylate monomer (B) is present in amounts of 5 to 100 parts by weight relative to the 100 parts of the oligomeric component (A) [0053] which overlaps or encompasses the range amounts disclosed in the instant specification [050, 052]. Regarding polythiol compound (C), Nakatani recites pentaerythritol tetrakis(3-mercaptopriopionate) [0067] which is a discloses in the instant specification as being suitable for the thiol part of the disclosed invention [035]. Given that the curable sealing material disclosed by Nakatani is identical to or substantially identical to the composition claimed and disclosed in the absence of objective evidence to the contrary, there is a reasonable expectation that the material disclosed by Nakatani would intrinsically exhibit the claimed adhesion strength property as well as one or more of the gel time, and/or surface tack free time, and/or room temperature cure time as recited in claim 10 (see MPEP 2112II,V).
Regarding claim 2, Nakatani teaches that the polythiol compound (C) may be a mercaptan terminated polyethyene glycol [0059, 0062, 0064] which corresponds to the claimed mercaptan terminated oligomer or polymer.
Regarding claim 3, Nakatani teaches that the polythiol compound (C) may comprises from 2 to 10 mercapto groups in the molecule [0054] which is an average functionality of from 2 to 10.
Regarding claim 4, the polyisoprene diacrylate disclosed by Nakatani (described above) corresponds to the claimed polyolefin segments in the (meth)acrylate functional polymer selected from polyisoprene.
Regarding claim 7, since neither claim 1 nor claim 7 positively recite that the filler, catalyst, or additive is present in the material, their presence is reasonably interpreted as being optional and therefore the material described above when addressing claim 1 is reasonably interpreted as meeting the limitation of claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, Nakatani teaches that reactive that the (meth)acrylate component (B) may be a dimethacrylate or trimethacrylate [0048] which corresponds to the claimed polyfunctional methacrylate monomer.
Regarding claim 9, given that the curable sealing material disclosed by modified Nakatani would have been identical to or substantially identical to the composition claimed and disclosed in the absence of objective evidence to the contrary, there is a reasonable expectation that the material disclosed by modified Nakatani would have intrinsically exhibited the claimed adhesive failure mode (see MPEP 2112II,V).
Regarding claim 11, Nakatani teaches that the composition cures so as to have a type-A durometer hardness (i.e., Shore A hardness) of 40 or less [0099] which overlaps, and therefore renders obvious the claimed Shore A hardness range.
Conclusion
Claims 1-11 are rejected. Claims 5 and 6 are free of prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEE E SANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1079. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30AM to 7:00PM.
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, Patricia Engle can be reached at 571-272-6660. 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.
/LEE E SANDERSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3991
Prosecution Insights