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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-3, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, and 25, in the reply filed on August 7, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 26 and 32-45 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
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 1-3, 8, 9, 15 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Goddard et al. (US 2021/0054157).
Regarding claim 1, Goddard et al. teach a method of making an active and/or intelligent packaging material (Abstract; paragraphs [0003], [0008], [0010], [0046], [0053]) comprising: providing a polymeric material comprising a tertiary carbon or hydroxyl group (Figure 3 – polylactic acid; Figure 9 – polypropylene; paragraph [0042]); reacting the polymeric material with a ligand (paragraphs [0046]-[0050], [0063]) and a radical initiator (Abstract; paragraphs [0039], [0055]) in an extruder under distinct first and second reaction conditions to cause covalent binding of the radical scavenging ligand to the polymeric material by direct bond formation (Figure 3: 190°C followed by 200°C reads on the claimed “distinct…conditions”; paragraphs [0069] and [0070] – optimization of conditions is also taught; [0110] – temperature profile in the extruder; [0115] – eight zones with increasing temperature profile reads on the claimed conditions; [0122], [0129], [0130] – eight zones with increasing temperature profile reads on the claimed conditions; Abstract, paragraph [0063] – directly bonded); and extruding the active and/or intelligent packaging material (Abstract; paragraphs [0037], [0069], [0072] and [0073]).
As set forth in Figure 6 of Goddard et al., the nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA) is a ligand that impacts/improves the radical scavenging ability of the grafted polymer. As such, the NTA of Goddard et al. is understood to read upon the claimed radical scavenging ligand and Goddard et al. is understood to anticipate the claimed invention.
Alternatively, Goddard et al. categorize the NTA as a chelating ligand and differentiate it from radical scavenging ligands (paragraphs [0046] and [0047]). In this narrower alternative interpretation, NTA is not considered a radical scavenger. However, Goddard et al. disclose that radical scavenging ligands may be utilized as the ligand in the invention (paragraph [0046]).
Therefore, in the alternative, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected a disclosed suitable ligand (e.g. a radical scavenger – paragraph [0046]) in either of the disclosed reactive extrusion embodiments of Goddard et al. (e.g. utilizing a cross-linking agent to form a bond with a linker or utilizing a radical initiator to form a direct bond between the ligand and the polymer) for the purpose, as suggested by Goddard et al., of effectively forming an active and/or intelligent material in a suitable and reasonably suggested manner. Goddard et al. do not explicitly exemplify or teach a radical scavenging ligand as set forth in paragraph [0046] is used with each of the disclosed covalent bonding embodiments. However, the teaching of Goddard et al. implies/suggests the applicability of the disclosed ligands with each of the disclosed bonding embodiments. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found utilizing the disclosed ligands in each of the disclosed embodiments prima facie obvious in order to produce a suitable, food-grade, active and/or intelligent packaging resin and would have had a reasonable expectation of success when attempting to do so.
As to claim 2, Goddard et al. teach polymeric materials as claimed (Figures 3 and 9; paragraph [0042]).
As to claim 3, Goddard et al. teach a peroxide initiator (paragraph [0055]).
As to claim 8, Goddard et al. teach extruding at a temperature below the melting temperature of the radical scavenging ligand/NTA and above the melting temperature of the polymeric material (Figure 3; paragraphs [0114], [0115], [0122] – melting temperature of the PLA is 157 °C; further, it is noted by the examiner that the melting temperature of NTA is about 246 °C).
As to claim 9, Goddard et al. teach and disclose the first corresponding conditions use a mixture of the polymer ligand and radical initiator (paragraphs [0039], [0069], [0115], [0129], [0130]).
As to claim 15, Goddard et al. teach and disclose reaction conditions above the melting temperature of both the ligand and the polymeric material (paragraphs [0046], [0051], [0129], [0130]-[0132]; the temperature is above the melting point of both polypropylene and epsilon-poly-lysine and the poly-lysine is understood to read upon the claimed radical scavenger). Alternatively, Goddard et al. teach utilizing radical scavenging ligands (paragraph [0046]) and further teach optimizing the extruding conditions/temperatures/pressure/residence time as the material travels through the extruder in order to achieve the desired reaction (paragraph [0069]). As such, the conditions along the zones of the extruder (e.g. temperature) are understood to be variables that would have been readily optimized as routine expedients. It is suggested by Goddard et al. that the conditions/temperature are result effective variables that would have been readily optimized. As such, Goddard et al. also render the claim prima facie obvious.
As to claim 25, Goddard et al. teach the material is food grade (Abstract; paragraphs [0003], [0013], [0016], [0036] and [0037]).
Claims 11, 12, 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goddard et al. (US 2021/0054157), as applied to claims 1-3, 8, 9, 15 and 25 above, alone or further in view of Gou et al. (US 2020/0189166).
As to claims 11, 12, 14 and 17, Goddard et al. teach and suggest the method set forth above. Goddard et al. do not explicitly teach mixing the ingredients in the claimed sequence. However, the sequence of mixing/adding materials is prima facie obvious absent a showing of new or unexpected results (see MPEP 2144.04 IV C). In this case, absent further specificity, the same packaging material is understood to be produced whether the ligand is added before or after the first reaction conditions are met (e.g. at the inlet or downstream in the extruder). Alternatively, Gou et al. disclose an analogous extrusion method wherein the radical initiator is added to the polymer at an upstream location in the extruder and additional additives are added downstream in the extruder (Figure 3).
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Goddard et al. and Gou et al. and to have included the additional additive/ligand downstream in the extruder at a location having the required conditions while including the initiator upstream in the extruder having the required conditions in the method of Goddard et al., as suggested by Gou et al., for the purpose, as suggested by the references, of effectively reactively extruding the material (e.g. Figure 3 of Goddard et al. showing the different conditions producing the required results for the initiator at 190°C and then for the NTA at 200°C where the NTA is not needed/performing a function until the peroxide has performed its function).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art discloses analogous active packaging materials.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeff Wollschlager whose telephone number is (571)272-8937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:30.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
/JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights