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 .
Preliminary Amendment
2. The preliminary amendment filed on July 26, 2024 has been entered in the above-identified application. Claims 1, 1,3, 14, 22, 24, and 27 are amended. New claims 28-31 have been added. Claims 1-31 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 1-8, 10, 11, 13, 16, 21-24, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blount (US 4317752).
Blount discloses a process for preparing polyisocyanate lignin-cellulose plastics by reaction of a lignin-cellulose polymer with a compound having at least two isocyanate groups to produce a lignin-cellulose polyisocyanate prepolymer. The prepolymer is then reacted with an organic compound to produce a polyisocyanate cellulose plastic. In the process, at least 3 components are used to produce the polyisocyanate cellulose plastics as follows: Component A: a broken-down alkali metal lignin-cellulose polymer; Component B: an organic polyisocyanate or polyisocyanate; Component C: an organic compound; and Component D: a curing agent and/or activator. Component A, a broken-down alkali metal lignin-cellulose polymer (equivalent to the lignin of the claimed invention), is produced by mixing a cellulose-containing plant or plant derivative and an alkali metal hydroxide (meeting the limitations of claim 4), then heating the mixture while agitating. Any suitable plant or the products of plants which contain cellulose may be used however wood is preferred plant (meeting the limitations of claim 5). Any suitable alkali metal hydroxide (equivalent to the alkaline pre-treatment of claim 4) may be used and include sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide and mixtures thereof. Component B is any suitable polyisocyanate and organic polyisocyanates such as tolylene diisocyanate, diphenylmethane diisocyanate, hexamethylene diisocyanate may be used (equivalent to the isocyanate of the claimed invention and meeting the limitations of claims 2 and 3). Component C (equivalent to the polyol of claim 8) contains organic amphiphilous compounds, which contain one OH group and/or at least one other hydrophilic and/or polar group and examples include thioalcohols, phenols and thiophenols. Surface-active additives (emulsifiers) (equivalent to the internal emulsifier of claim 10) may also be used, and examples include surface-active additives such as ammonium salts of sulphonic acids (meeting the limitation that the internal emulsifier comprises a quaternary ammonium group and a carboxylate group as recited in claim 11). Component D contains the curing agents and/or activators and water (thus meeting the limitation that the composition is a waterborne polyurethane dispersion comprising water). The broken-down alkali metal lignin-cellulose product, isocyanate and the organic compound will react chemically to produce a polyisocyanate lignincellulose plastic product. The blowing agents used may be, e.g., acetone, ethyl acetate, methanol, ethanol, and halogenated alkanes (meeting the limitations of claim 16), can be added. The proportions of the components may be adjusted to obtain the desired product, ranging from a solid to a highly cellular solid. The products produced have many uses and may also be used as light-weight building bricks in the form of sandwiches, e.g., with metal-covering layers for house building and the construction of motor vehicles and aircraft. (see Abstract and Col. 1, lines 13-65; Col. 2, lines 33-68; Col. 5, lines 1-68; Col. 6, 18-26; Col. 7, 48-68; Col. 8, lines 53-63; Col. 10, lines 30-40; Col. 11, lines 35-42; Col. 12, lines 14-25; Col. 13, lines 37-46; Col. 14, lines 1-20).
With regards to the limitation that the lignin comprises aliphatic hydroxyl groups and having an aliphatic hydroxyl content of at least 2 mmol/g; and the property limitations of claim 7, the Examiner takes the position that such properties are inherent in the lignin taught by Blount given that the chemical composition of the lignin used by Bliount as well as the princes of preparing the lignin as taught by Blunt is identical to the one of the claimed invention.
With regards to claim 6, the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production if the product is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In this case, the method of extracting the lignin does not provide distinctive structural characteristics to the lignin.
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 9, 12, 14, 15, 18-20, 25, 26, and 28-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blount (US 4317752).
With regards to the concentration or size of the various components taught by Blount, the Examiner would like to point out 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, particularly given that Blount specifically states that the proportions of the components may be adjusted to obtain the desired product,
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
6. 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