Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/761,780

CELLULOSE COMPOSITE RESIN AND METHOD FOR THE PRODUCTION THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 02, 2024
Examiner
SASTRI, SATYA B
Art Unit
1762
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Panasonic Holdings Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
561 granted / 888 resolved
-1.8% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
63 currently pending
Career history
951
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.2%
+7.2% vs TC avg
§102
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
§112
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 888 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-8 are currently pending in the application. 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. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kosonen et al. US 2016/0063984 A1), cited in IDS dated 7/2/24). Regarding claim 1, Kosonen teaches a composite comprising a thermoplastic matrix polymer (reads on a base resin) and organic natural fiber-based material, such as cellulose-based fibers (Ab., [0041]-[0052, ref. claims 1, 23, 26)). Kosonen further teaches that the composites may include one or more additives, such as impact modifiers having rubber domains and low stiffness, such as thermoplastic polyolefins/elastomers (TTP/TPE) and poly (styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene) (SEBS) (read on rubber-containing polymer) [0070], and a dispersing agent [0071]. Kosonen teaches blending of components of the composite with a matrix polymer melt at elevated temperatures that enable polymer flow to wet the surfaces [0152], that other components may be mixed with the melt later or before the inorganic natural fiber has been added, and that components are mixed with the polymer melt when the viscosity of the polymer is low [0160]. Kosonen is silent on a method comprising preparing a first mixture and a second mixture as in the claimed invention. At the outset, it is noted that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). See MPEP § 2144.05. Given the teaching in Kosonen on components of the composition and a method of mixing the components, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to prepare a composite mixing the components in any process order for a sufficient duration, so as to form a uniform blend with optimal composite properties. As such, selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results, as is selection of any order of mixing ingredients. See MPEP 2144.04. Given the teaching on blending of components with polymer melt at elevated temperatures that enable polymer flow to wet the surfaces, a skilled artisan would have found it obvious to blend the polymer melt with the dispersant and cellulose fibers in the first step for a time period sufficient so as to wet the cellulose fibers and disperse them uniformly in the matrix melt, and then add any high molecular weight material, such as the impact modifying polymer, and kneading the mixture, including for a duration within the scope of the claimed invention, absent evidence of criticality for the claimed process. Regarding claim 2, Kosonen teaches such as a cellulose-based material preferably having an alfa cellulose content of above 50 wt.% to below 99 wt.% [0052]. Regarding claim 3, Kosonen teaches 10-90 wt.% of organic fiber-based material and 5-90 wt. % of thermoplastic polymer in a composite comprising a matrix material and the organic natural fiber-based material ([0042], [0133], [0138]-[0139], Examples 5 and 7, ref. claims 38 and 40). Regarding claim 4, Kosonen teaches a dispersing agent for facilitating and/or stabilizing the dispersion of solid compounding materials in the polymeric matrix, such as a silane [0071] and/or a maleic anhydride grafted thermoplastic polymer [0072]. It is the Examiner’s position that the amount of a dispersing agent is a result effective variable because changing it will clearly affect the type of product obtained. See MPEP § 2144.05 (B). Thus, it would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art to include an appropriately effective amount of a dispersing agent, including in amounts within the scope of the claimed invention, so as to provide for the desired level of fiber dispersion. In the alternative, Kosonen teaches 0.01-5.00 wt.% of the composite, of lubricants, such as fatty acids, esters of long chain fatty acids and stearic acid salt, i.e., a fatty acid metal salt, for reducing friction and improving flow properties, said lubricants overlapping in scope with the dispersing agents of the instant disclosure [0028]. Regarding claim 5, Kosonen teaches thermoplastic polyolefins/elastomers (TPO/TPE) and poly (styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene) (SEBS) as impact modifiers having rubber domains and low stiffness [0070]. Thus, the amount thereof in the composite would be a result effective variable because changing it will clearly affect the type of product obtained. Therefore, it would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art to include an appropriately effective amount of impact modifier, including in amounts within the scope of the claimed invention so as to provide for the desired level of toughening. Regarding claim 6, Kosonen teaches impact modification (poly)-styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene (SEBS) [0070], which is also disclosed in the present specification [0029]. SEBS is hydrocarbon-based polymer and meets the claimed electronegativity difference between adjacent atoms. Regarding claim 7, Kosonen teaches a pigment as an additive [0065]. Regarding claim 8, Kosonen teaches polyolefins, e.g., polyethylene and polypropylene, as matrix polymers ([0043-0044, Examples, ref. claim 23). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. JP2011-231237 A (machine translation) teaches a composition comprising polypropylene, a rubber-containing polymer, a compatibilizer and a cellulose fiber having an alpha content of 80% or more. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Satya Sastri at (571) 272 1112. The examiner can be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5.30PM (EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Mr. Robert Jones can be reached at (571)-270- 7733. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273 8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll- free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272- 1000. /Satya B Sastri/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590183
POLYALKYLENEIMINE-BASED POLYMERS CONTAINING POLYETHER CHAINS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584015
POLYIMIDE RESIN COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583958
PHOTOPOLYMER FOR ANTI-YELLOWING AND ANTI-THERMAL CRACKING APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577408
WATER-BASED COATING COMPOSITION, AND MULTI-LAYER COATING FILM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577341
Copolymer Derived From Substituted Benzopinacol And Use Of The Same As Polymerization Initiator
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+29.5%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 888 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month