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 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.
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 nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (WO 2019/189092, US 2021/0023828 relied upon for citations) in view of Yamashita (JP 2021-001650, machine translation relied upon).
Yamada (WO 2019/189092, US 2021/0023828 relied upon for citations) teaches a laminate and pouch comprising the laminate. The laminate (10) is formed from a substrate (20), a heat seal (30), and an interlayer (40). An adhesive (50) may be included between any of the layers (¶43-47). The amount of olefin in the laminate is 90% by mass or more (claim 6).
The substrate, heat seal, and interlayer can be a polyethylene (¶58) with the substrate stretched (¶14) and the heat seal un-stretched (¶135). The adhesive may be polyurethane (¶172).
As such Yamada teaches (see Figs) a laminate with an un-stretched polyethylene layer (30) (claim 1—thermoplastic, claim 2—polyethylene, claim 7—sealant film) bonded to a stretched second polyethylene layer (20) (claim 1—thermoplastic, claim 2—polyethylene, claim 7—other thermoplastic, claim 8/10—stretched film), with a PE interlayer (40) between the two (claim 9—intermediate thermoplastic), where the interlayer and/or substrate can be provided with an inorganic coating or organic coating (¶166) (claim 8/11—coating).
Yamada differs from claim 1 in that it does not teach the adhesive incorporates polyrotaxane.
Yamashita teaches a vacuum insulation formed of two exterior materials heat sealed together (¶4). The bag can also include adhesive (¶5) in particular polyurethane adhesive with 0.1-10% polyrotaxane added to allow for the adhesive to expand and contract (¶¶9,39).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to includes in the polyurethane adhesive of Yamada 0.1-10% polyrotaxane as taught by Yamashita for the benefit of an adhesive which can expand and contract without delamination. In so far as both are directed to heat sealed materials using polyurethane adhesives there would be a reasonable expectation of success in combining the two.
Yamada in view of Yamashita renders obvious claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-12.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (WO 2019/189092, US 2021/0023828 relied upon for citations) in view of Yamashita (JP 2021-001650, machine translation relied upon) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Tau (US 2003/0216518).
With respect to claim 3, Yamada teaches polyethylene-based resins but not both polyethylene and polypropylene.
Tau teaches a blend composition comprising at least one coupled propylene polymer and at least 55 weight percent of at least one ethylene polymer, based on the total weight of the coupled propylene polymer and the ethylene polymer (abstract). Tau teaches blending a minor proportion of a rheology modified (also known as “coupled”) PP resin into a major proportion of an LLDPE resin yields a film with a high modulus and which also maintains good toughness (¶6). Tau teaches the films can be used in packaging substrates and multi-wall bags (¶81).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate the coupled propylene polymer taught by Tau into the polyethylene resin compositions of Yamada. This modification would allow the artisan to achieve a film with an increased modulus while retaining good toughness, directly following Tau's teachings.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (WO 2019/189092, US 2021/0023828 relied upon for citations) in view of Yamashita (JP 2021-001650, machine translation relied upon) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Oomori (US 2015/0094463).
With respect to claim 6, Yamashita teaches the polyrotaxane-containing resin is a polyrotaxane compound having a cyclic molecule having a reactive hydroxyl group in its molecule, a linear molecule that pierces the cyclic molecule in a skewer-like manner, and sealing groups positioned at both ends of the linear molecule that prevent the cyclic molecule from detaching (¶38) but fails to explicitly teaches the functional group at a terminal of a side chain of a cyclic molecule is a hydroxyl group.
Oomori is directed to a polyrotaxane which includes hydroxyl group-containing cyclic molecules, a linear molecule threaded through the cyclic molecules to form a clathrate, and blocking groups at both ends of the linear molecule to prevent the separation of the cyclic molecules from the linear molecule (abstract). Oomori teaches the polyrotaxane is a hydroxypropylated polyrotaxane (¶167) and give polyrotaxane with advantageous properties (¶169) and may be used in adhesives (¶197).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use as the polyrotaxane a hydroxypropylated polyrotaxane as taught in Oomori for the benefit of the advantageous properties disclosed therein. A person would have a reasonable expectation of success in that Oomori specifically teaches the use of the polyrotaxane in adhesives.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK J VINEIS whose telephone number is (571)270-1547. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
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, Greg Tryder can be reached at (571) 270-7365. 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.
/FRANK J VINEIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights