DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Amendments to claim 1 have been entered in the above-identified application. New claim 16 is added. Claims 1-16 are pending and under consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Case et al. (US 5209983).
Case et al. disclose adhesives suitable for preparing laminates of polyvinyl chloride or polyvinyl chloride copolymers with wood or metal (equivalent to the multi-layer structure comprising at least one polyvinyl chloride (PVC) layer and at least one metal layer as recited in claim 1 and meeting the limitations of claim 15) and the adhesives are prepared from a polymer mixture of polyvinyl chloride or its copolymers itself, a direct ethylene copolymer preferably containing units derived from carbon monoxide, and another direct ethylene copolymer containing units derived from a monomer containing glycidyl units. The adhesive comprises (a) 5-65 weight percent of polyvinyl chloride or a polyvinyl chloride copolymer; (b) 15-75 weight percent of a first ethylene copolymer, said first copolymer being a direct copolymer containing 30-95 weight percent ethylene and (i) from 0-50 weight percent of a moiety derived from a comonomer consisting of at least one alkyl acrylate, alkyl methacrylate, alkyl vinyl ether, vinyl acetate or mixtures thereof where the alkyl radical contains 1-8 carbon atoms, and also containing (ii) 0-20 weight percent of a moiety derived from a comonomer consisting of carbon monoxide or sulfur dioxide (equivalent to the 0 to 95 wt.% of at least one ethylene acrylate copolymer, wherein the acrylate is selected from vinyl acetate, alkyl acrylate, or maleic anhydride mono ester; as recited in claim 1 and meeting the limitations of claim 10) and (c) 2-25 weight percent of a second ethylene copolymer, said second copolymer being a direct copolymer containing from 0-50 weight percent of a moiety derived from at least one alkyl acrylate, alkyl methacrylate, alkyl vinyl ether, vinyl acetate or mixtures thereof where the alkyl radical contains 1-8 carbon atoms, and also containing 1-15 weight percent of a moiety derived from glycidyl acrylate, glycidyl methacrylate or glycidyl vinyl ether (equivalent to the 5 to 100 wt.% of terpolymer represented by the formula of E/V/W, wherein E is ethylene, V is an acrylic ester commoner selected from vinyl acetate, alkyl acrylate, or maleic anhydride mono ester, and W is a functional group selected from an epoxy, maleic anhydride, and a carboxyl group as recited in claim 1). The second ethylene copolymer may have a comonomer which is selected from the same group of monomers (i) as those in the first copolymer, namely alkyl acrylates, methacrylates or vinyl ethers and vinyl acetate, and may by present in amounts up to about 50 weight percent. The second copolymer must have a comonomer containing a glycidyl group such comonomers are glycidyl acrylate, glycidyl methacrylate and glycidyl vinyl ether. This monomer may be present at levels between 1 and 15 weight percent, preferably from 3-11 weight percent. The preferred second copolymers are terpolymers, and the preferred terpolymer is ethylene/n-butyl acrylate/glycidyl methacrylate containing from 10-40 percent n-butyl acrylate and 3-11 percent glycidyl methacrylate (meeting the limitations of claims 9, 11, 12, and 13). The amount of each of the three components of the adhesive can vary widely. In making the laminate of PVC or PVC copolymer with a wood or a metal laminate co-layer, it is preferable to pre-treat the wood or metal substrate with a silane solution. This is a well-known procedure and is particularly useful when the laminates are subject to a moist environment. Typical silanes for this purposes are amino-functional silanes, particularly amino trialkoxy silanes, for example aminotriethoxy silane (equivalent to the silane coupling agent compounded in the tie layer, applied as a primer layer onto the PVC layer and equivalent to the structure of claim 1 and the silanes used in the Examples of the instant application and meeting the limitations of claim 2, 4, and 8). With regards to claim 14, the ranges taught by Case et al. include the claimed ranges for the ethylene acrylate copolymer and the terpolymer. (See Abstract and Column 1, lines 64-68, Column 2, lines 1-29, Column 3, lines 22-68, Column 4, lines 1-15, 22-27, 36-43, and Examples). All limitations of claims 1, 2, 4, and 6-15 are taught in the above reference.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
4. Claims 1, 2, and 4-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Case et al. (US 5209983).
With regards to the limitation that the primer layer is applied at an amount of 0.01 to 100 g/m² and the tie layer comprises from 0.01 to 10 wt.% silane coupling agent, the Examiner takes the position that workable physical properties and concentrations are deemed to be obvious routine optimizations to one of ordinary skill in the art, motivated by the desire to obtain the required properties.
With regards to the limitation that the silane coupling agent is compounded into
the tie layer, applied as a primer layer onto the PVC layer, or both, Applicant is reminded that the configuration of the claimed structure (i.e., the order of the layers) is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed multilayer structure results in new or unexpected results.
5. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Case et al. (US 5209983) in view of Weissberger et al. (US 4759971 A1).
Case et al. do not teach that the metal layer is aluminum or steel. However, Weissberger et al. teach a multilayered structure comprising a substrate layer secured to a layer comprising a composite of a polymer. The substrate layer and a polymeric composite layer are secured to each other and the polymers which may be used in the multilayered structures may be selected from the group consisting of polyamides, polyesters, polyolefins, polyurethanes, polyvinylchlorides, poly vinylidene chlorides, etc. and the substrate is a metal, e.g. aluminum, copper, steel, or ferrous alloys. The disclosed structure has been found to be extremely useful in packaging the above described foodstuffs, especially butter, soft cheese, margarine, fresh meat and the like which are sensitive to water vapor and/or oxygen. Furthermore, the structures are useful in packaging beverages, meat products, fruits, vegetables, nuts, drugs or medicines, oils, or lotions and the like, which require protection from odors, moisture vapor, and/or oxygen. (See Abstract and Column 1, lines 5-15, Column 2, lines 41-64, Column 5, lines 8-10, 62-68, and Column 6, lines 1-28).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use an aluminum or steel substrate in the structure taught by Case et al. given that Weissberger et al. teach that such structures are useful in packaging materials that require protection from odors, moisture vapor, and/or oxygen.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant's arguments filed on May 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants traverse the rejection of under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Case et al. (US 5209983) and the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Case et al. (US 5209983) and submit that in both the multilayer structure and the structure of Case, a PVC layer and a second layer are positioned on opposite sides of a tie layer and the Applicants assert Case only teaches applying the silane as a primer onto the wood layer and not onto the PVC layer.
However, there is nothing in the claims to preclude the presence of additional layers given that the claim simply states that the primer layer is on the PVC layer, but does not state that the primer layer is directly on the PVC layer.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEEBA AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1504. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7am-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, 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.
/SHEEBA AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights