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 .
Examiner’s note: Please provide future amendments with only black text, no color or greyscale.
37 CFR § 1.52 (b)(1)(i) requires the application to be “presented in a form having sufficient clarity and contrast” to permit “electronic capture by use of digital imaging and optical character recognition”; see 37 CFR § 1.52(a)(1)(v).
To meet this requirement, the Patent Center guidelines suggest that Applicant submit all text in only black.
In this case, it appears that Applicant may have submitted amendments (i.e., claims containing underlines, strikethroughs, or “track changes”, etc., and similar changes to the specification) with text/font/characters in color or greyscale, rather than only black. This results in issues and delays prosecution because USPTO systems/tools for recognition/conversion do not handle well claims/text which contain color or greyscale.
In the future, please follow Patent Center guidelines and provide claims and all text in only black. Failure to do so may result in a Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment. Thank you.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks filed 02/17/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding the prior drawing objections, specification objections, claim objections, 112(d) rejections, Applicant’s amendments overcome all prior objections/rejections.
Regarding the prior 112(b) rejections, Applicant’s amendments overcome some prior rejections.
Regarding the 112(b) rejections regarding the term “about”, in paragraphs 1-2 of page 6 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant’s arguments are directed to that the rejections should be withdrawn because the term "must be given a reasonable scope and be viewed as it would be understood by persons skilled in the field of the invention." Respectfully, the argument is not persuasive because, in this case, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art would be unable to identify whether, for example, a foam density is about 70 kg/m3 or not about 70 kg/m3. For example, would a foam having a density of 60 kg/m3 meet the requirement of “about 70 kg/m3”? This application does not provide enough information to answer that. Therefore the rejections are maintained.
Regarding the prior art rejection of claim 1, in paragraph 3 of page 7 through paragraph 1 of page 8 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant’s arguments are directed to that the base reference Abrevaya is not prior art to the present claims and Applicant provides a Declaration of Common Ownership identifying such. In view of Applicant’s Declaration of Common Ownership, the rejection is withdrawn. Please see allowable subject matter below.
Regarding rejoinder, in paragraph 2 of page 8 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant remarks are directed to requesting rejoinder because the claims are in condition for allowance. In this case a rejoinder cannot be made at this time because the claims are not in condition for allowance (see for example the 112b rejections above).
Claim Interpretation
“1234ze(E)” is assumed to identify trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoropropene, per para 0044.
“PEF:PET copolymer” is assumed to identify a polymer having at least about 0.5 mole% ethylene furanoate moieties and at least 0.5% of ethylene terephthalate moieties, per para 0053.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. - The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-10, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1-6, 10, 17 recite the term “about”, which is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art would be unable to identify whether, for example, a foam density is about 70 kg/m3 or not about 70 kg/m3.
Claim(s) 2-6, 9-10, 17 is/are also rejected by virtue of dependency.
In view of the 112(b) rejections set forth above, the claims are rejected below as best understood.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2-6, 9-10, 17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 1, US 20230265255 A1 (hereinafter Abrevaya) is the closest known reference disclosing the limitations of claim 1. See the 35 USC § 102 prior art rejection of claim 1 in the office action mailed on 09/15/2025 for details. Applicant’s remarks filed on 02/17/2026 provided a Declaration of Common Ownership identifying that Abrevaya is not prior art to the present claims. The next closest known reference, US 20200172661 A1 (hereinafter AlFarhood), used as a teaching reference in the prior art rejections of the office action mailed on 09/15/2025 and directed towards thermoplastic foams made from PEF or PET, does not disclose teach or suggest the limitations of claim 1.
Other closest known references include US 20090305876 A1, teaching a thermoplastic foam comprising closed cells and open cells blown with 1234ze, comprising copolymers such a PET; and US 20200308363 A1, teaching a copolymer of PET for "insulation and/or other building and industrial application". These references also do not disclose teach or suggest the limitations of claim 1.
At this time, the prior art of record does not fairly disclose, teach, or suggest the missing limitation(s) as described above such that a modification would be possible in order to arrive at the claimed invention. The claim is therefore deemed to be allowable over the prior art.
Claims -6, 9-10, 17 each depend from claim 1 and are therefore allowable over the prior art for at least that reason.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Art Golik whose telephone number is (571)272-6211. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:00.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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.
/Art Golik/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745