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
Claims 1-24 are cancelled.
In view of the amendment, field on 02/04/2026, the following rejections are withdrawn from the previous office action, mailed on 11/05/2025.
Rejection of claims 25-44 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
The following rejections are maintained for the reason of records as given in the previous office action. The bases of these rejections are the same as given in the office action, mailed on 11/05/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 25-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amory et al (US 5,221,580).
As to claims 25 and 36, Amory et al. (US ‘580) disclose a process for producing large format vinyl acetate ethylene (VAE) co-polymers (col. 2, lines 5-11), comprising: providing VAE co-polymers as an aqueous dispersions stabilized by one or more protective colloids (col. 2, lines 26-33); drying of the aqueous dispersions of VAE co-polymers using protective colloids (col. 6, lines 35-40), wherein the drying of the aqueous dispersions is carried out by fluidized-bed drying (col. 3, line 50-58); providing an amount of said dispersible VAE co-polymer powders (col. 1, line 52); inserting an amount of the dispersible VAE co-polymer powders into an extruder or into a roller compaction machine (col. 2, lines 5-11); and forming an amount of large format VAE pellets or granules (col. 1, lines 65-68).
Amory et al. (US ‘580) is silent on disclosing obtaining VAE co-polymers in a water-redispersible powder form in the drying step of aqueous dispersions of VAE co-polymers, as claimed in claims 25 and 36.
However, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the time of applicant’s invention, to modify the drying step of the aqueous dispersions of VAE co-polymers, as taught by Amory et al. (US ‘580), so to obtain VAE co-polymers which are in the form of water-redispersible powders in order to form granules that are not tacky and can be stored without problem and are useful as coextrusion adhesives. See the abstract.
As to claim 26, Amory et al. (US ‘580) disclose the large format VAE pellets or granules produced are free flowing and/or eliminates or reduces the amount of combustible VAE dispersible co-polymer fines and/or dust produced; or wherein the large format VAE pellets or granules produced are pure or substantially pure VAE co-polymers such that only vinyl acetate and ethylene monomers and no other monomers are present. (See col. 2, lines 25-33)
As to claim 27, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teach the large format VAE pellets or granules produced have a cylindrical, egg, ellipsoid, oval and/or ovoid shape. (See col. 1, lines 65-68)
As to claim 28, Amory et al. (US ‘580) disclose the large format VAE pellets or granules produced have a particle size of approximately 1.0 mm to approximately 8 mm. (see col. 3, lines 44-49)
As to claim 29, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teach the large format VAE pellets or granules produced have a moisture content of approximately 3% or less. (See col. 4, lines 40-45)
As to claim 30, Amory et al. (US ‘580) disclose the extruder has one or more zones having a pre-determined temperature profile; and wherein the pre-determined temperature profile heats the dispersible VAE co-polymer powders to approximately 100° C. to approximately 220° C., from approximately 125° C. to approximately 200° C., from approximately 140° C. to approximately 190° C., from approximately 160° C. to approximately 175° C. (See col. 4, lines 1-22)
As to claim 31, Amory et al. (US ‘580) discloses an underwater pelletizing process. (See col. 2, lines 6-11)
As to claim 32, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teaches the underwater pelletizing process comprises one or more shearing members, a bath, one or more driers and/or one or more pumps; wherein the one or more shearing members are operably configured to break down the extruded dispersible VAE co-polymer into smaller pieces; and wherein the one or more driers are operably configured to reduce the moisture content of the large format VAE pellets or granules produced have a moisture content of approximately 3% or less. (See col. 4, lines 40-45)
As to claim 33, Amory et al. (US ‘580) discloses providing one or more classifiers; and wherein the one or more classifiers are operably configured to output large format VAE pellets or granules having a pre-determined particle size. (see col. 3, lines 44-49)
As to claim 34, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teaches providing one or more pigments, fillers, foam stabilizers, hydrophobicizing agents and/or cement plasticizers; and adding the one or more pigments, fillers, foam stabilizers, hydrophobicizing agents and/or cement plasticizers to the VAE co-polymer powders. (See col. 1, lines 50-57)
As to claim 35, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teach the large format VAE pellets or granules produced are combined with hydraulically setting binders, for the production of construction adhesives; or wherein the large format VAE pellets or granules produced are used within cementitious type products, asphalt related products, asphalt roofing products and/or other construction related products. (See col. 3, lines 20-42)
As to claim 37, Amory et al. (US ‘580) disclose the roller compaction machine includes a plurality of rollers that are disposed adjacent to one another; wherein an amount of the dispersible VAE co-polymer powders are fed between the plurality of rollers; and wherein the plurality of rollers transform the dispersible VAE co-polymer powders into a plurality of large format VAE co-polymers. (See col. 3, lines 50-55)
As to claim 38, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teach providing one or more shearing members; wherein the one or more shearing members are operably configured to break down the plurality of large format VAE co-polymers formed by the plurality of rollers into smaller pieces. (See col. 3, lines 43-49)
As to claim 39, Amory et al. (US ‘580) disclose the large format VAE pellets or granules produced have a particle size of approximately 1.0 mm to approximately 8 mm (see col. 3, lines 44-49), and further, the large format VAE pellets or granules produced have a moisture content of approximately 3% or less. (See col. 4, lines 40-45)
As to claim 40, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teach the large format VAE pellets or granules produced have a cylindrical, egg, ellipsoid, oval and/or ovoid shape. (See col. 1, lines 65-68) and the large format VAE pellets or granules produced are free flowing and/or eliminates or reduces the amount of combustible VAE dispersible co-polymer fines and/or dust produced; or wherein the large format VAE pellets or granules produced are pure or substantially pure VAE co-polymers such that only vinyl acetate and ethylene monomers and no other monomers are present. (See col. 2, lines 25-33)
As to claim 41, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teach providing one or more classifiers; and wherein the one or more classifiers are operably configured to output large format VAE pellets or granules having a pre-determined particle size. (see col. 3, lines 44-49)
As to claim 42, Amory et al. (US ‘580) disclose feeding an amount of the large format VAE co-polymers having a size larger than the pre-determined desired particle size fed back into the roller compaction machine at a location between the plurality of rollers and one or more shearing members; and/or feeding an amount of the large format VAE co-polymers having a size larger than the pre-determined desired particle size back into the roller compaction machine at a location before the plurality of rollers. (See col. 2, lines 25-33)
As to claim 43, Amory et al. (US ‘580) teaches providing one or more pigments, fillers, foam stabilizers, hydrophobicizing agents and/or cement plasticizers; and adding the one or more pigments, fillers, foam stabilizers, hydrophobicizing agents and/or cement plasticizers to the VAE co-polymer powders. (See col. 1, lines 50-57)
As to claim 44, Amory et al. (US ‘580) discloses the large format VAE co-polymers produced are combined with hydraulically setting binders including cements, gypsum and/or waterglass, for the production of construction adhesives; or wherein the large format VAE pellets or granules produced are used within cementitious type products, asphalt related products, asphalt roofing products and/or other construction related products. (See col. 3, lines 20-42)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed on 02/04/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments are essentially on the matter that the prior art of Amory is a non-analogous art and the set forth prior art rejection is based on impermissible hindsight reasoning.
In response, applicant’s arguments are not essentially persuasive because regarding that Amory et al. (US ‘580) is a non-analogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Further, in response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Further, Applicant argues that “Amory fails to disclose the VAE co-polymers in the form of aqueous dispersion stabilized by protective colloids. Additionally, Amory et al. fails to disclose water-redispersible powders, particularly not the preparation of such powders by drying carried out by means of fluidized-bed drying of the present water-redisersible powders”.
This is not found persuasive. As it has been clarified above in the body of the rejection, Amory et al. (US ‘580) disclose a process for producing large format vinyl acetate ethylene (VAE) co-polymers (col. 2, lines 5-11), comprising: providing VAE co-polymers in the form of aqueous dispersions stabilized by one or more protective colloids (col. 2, lines 26-33); drying of the aqueous dispersions of VAE co-polymers in the presence of protective colloids (col. 6, lines 35-40), wherein the drying of the aqueous dispersions is carried out by fluidized-bed drying (col. 3, line 50-58); providing an amount of said dispersible VAE co-polymer powders (col. 1, line 52); inserting an amount of the dispersible VAE co-polymer powders into an extruder or into a roller compaction machine (col. 2, lines 5-11); and forming an amount of large format VAE pellets or granules (col. 1, lines 65-68). Even though Amory et al. (US ‘580) is silent on disclosing obtaining VAE co-polymers in form of water-redispersible powders in the drying step of aqueous dispersions of VAE co-polymers, as claimed in claims 25 and 36, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the time of applicant’s invention, to modify the drying step of the aqueous dispersions of VAE co-polymers, as taught by Amory et al. (US ‘580), so to obtain VAE co-polymers which are in the form of water-redispersible powders in order to form granules that are not tacky and can be stored without problem and are useful as coextrusion adhesives. See the abstract.
Finally, after a full review of the submitted remarks in view of prior art rejections, it has been concluded that there are differences in interpreting the claimed subject matter and the cited references by the Applicant and the Office. Therefore, Examiner would like to suggest that if Applicant’s Counsel believes an interview can benefit the prosecution of the instant application, Applicant’s Counsel is kindly invited to contact the undersigned examiner.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEYED MASOUD MALEKZADEH whose telephone number is (571)272-6215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, SUSAN D. LEONG can be reached at (571)270-1487. 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.
/SEYED MASOUD MALEKZADEH/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1754
04/18/2026