Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/997,951

OBJECT COMPRISING A SEALING LAYER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 23, 2025
Priority
Jul 29, 2022 — CN PCT/CN2022/109007 +2 more
Examiner
FERGUSON, LAWRENCE D
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
SABIC (Saudi Basic Industries Corporation)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
793 granted / 1012 resolved
+18.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1040
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
50.9%
+10.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1012 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . DETAILED ACTION Information Disclosure Statement 1. The references disclosed within the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 23, 2025, has been considered and initialed by the Examiner. Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102(a)(1) 2. 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. 3. Claims 1-4, 6-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fan et al. (WO 2021204799). Fan discloses a sealing layer comprising polyethylene comprising moieties derived from ethylene and moieties derived from α-olefin comprising 4 to 10 carbon atoms, the polyethylene having a density of ≥ 870 and ≤ 920 kg/m3, where the polyethylene has a fractionation of material (a-TREF) at a temperature ≤ 30.0°C of ≥ 5.0 wt% and ≤ 15.0 wt%, with regard to the total weight of the polyethylene (abstract). Because Fan discloses an object comprising a sealing layer with the same materials as claimed and preferentially disclosed, the article of Fan will inherently possess the distinct peaks and Mw/Mn ratio claimed. Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties. Therefore, because Fan has the same chemical structure, the properties, including distinct peaks and Mw/Mn ratio are necessarily present. MPEP 2112.01 II, as in claim 1. Concerning claim 2, Fan discloses a sealing layer comprising polyethylene comprising moieties derived from ethylene and moieties derived from α-olefin comprising 4 to 10 carbon atoms, the polyethylene having a density of ≥ 870 and ≤ 920 kg/m3, where the polyethylene has a fractionation of material (a-TREF) at a temperature ≤ 30.0°C of ≥ 5.0 wt% and ≤ 15.0 wt%, with regard to the total weight of the polyethylene (abstract). Because Fan discloses an object comprising a sealing layer with the same materials as claimed and preferentially disclosed, the article of Fan will inherently possess the short chain branching ratio claimed. Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties. Therefore, because Fan has the same chemical structure, the properties, including short chain branching ratio are necessarily present. MPEP 2112.01 II. Concerning claim 3, Fan discloses a sealing layer comprising polyethylene comprising moieties derived from ethylene and moieties derived from α-olefin comprising 4 to 10 carbon atoms, the polyethylene having a density of ≥ 870 and ≤ 920 kg/m3, where the polyethylene has a fractionation of material (a-TREF) at a temperature ≤ 30.0°C of ≥ 5.0 wt% and ≤ 15.0 wt%, with regard to the total weight of the polyethylene (abstract). Because Fan discloses an object comprising a sealing layer with the same materials as claimed and preferentially disclosed, the article of Fan will inherently possess the melt mass-flow rate claimed. Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties. Therefore, because Fan has the same chemical structure, the properties, including melt mass-flow rate are necessarily present. MPEP 2112.01 II. Concerning claim 4, Fan discloses a sealing layer comprising > 10.0 wt% and < 90.0 wt% of the polyethylene A, with regard to the total weight of the sealing layer (claim 4 of Fan). Concerning claims 6-7, Fan discloses the polyethylene is a copolymer comprising moieties of ethylene and moieties derived from 1-butene, 1-hexene or 1-octene (claim 5 of Fan). Concerning claim 8, Fan discloses a sealing layer comprising > 10.0 wt% and < 90.0 wt% of the polyethylene A, with regard to the total weight of the sealing layer (claim 4 of Fan). Concerning claim 10, Fan discloses a film comprising sealing layer comprising a polyethylene comprising moieties (abstract). Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103 4. 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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. 5. Claims 9, 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan et al. (WO 2021204799). Fan discloses a sealing layer comprising polyethylene comprising moieties derived from ethylene and moieties derived from α-olefin comprising 4 to 10 carbon atoms, the polyethylene having a density of ≥ 870 and ≤ 920 kg/m3, where the polyethylene has a fractionation of material (a-TREF) at a temperature ≤ 30.0°C of ≥ 5.0 wt% and ≤ 15.0 wt%, with regard to the total weight of the polyethylene (abstract), as in claim 9. In claim 9, the phrase, “produced via a solution polymerisation process, and/or wherein the polyethylene is produced using a metallocene-type catalyst” introduces a process limitation to the product claim. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim 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 re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966. Concerning claim 11, Fan discloses the sealing layer has a thickness of 1-100um (claim 11 of Fan). Concerning claim 12, Fan discloses the film has a multi-layer structure (claim 13 of Fan). Concerning claim 13, Fan discloses the film has a multi-layer structure where one or both of the outer surfaces of the structure is constituted by the sealing layer (claim 13 of Fan). Concerning claim 14, Fan discloses a sealing layer comprising > 10.0 wt% and < 90.0 wt% of the polyethylene A, with regard to the total weight of the sealing layer (claim 4 of Fan). Concerning claim 15, Fan discloses where the structure comprises 3-15 layers (claim 15 of Fan). Claim Objections 6. Claim 5 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. The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited object further including where the sealing layer comprises > 98.0 wt% of ethylene based polymer materials. The prior art does not teach motivation or suggestion for modification to make the invention as instantly claimed. Conclusion 7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lawrence Ferguson whose telephone number is 571-272-1522. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 9:00 AM – 5:30PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Frank Vineis, can be reached on 571-270-1547. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /LAWRENCE D FERGUSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 23, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12746867
FLOOR MAT ATTACHMENT
3y 1m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12746713
VEHICLE INTERIOR PANEL WITH REINFORCING LAYER AND RELATED METHOD
2y 8m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12747533
SILK PROTEIN BONDED LAYERED MATERIALS AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USING THEREOF
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12747526
SOFT ABSORBENT COFORM NONWOVEN WEB
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12747354
POLYMER COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING ALKYL SILICONE AND ARTICLES FORMED FROM SAME
1y 1m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+13.2%)
2y 10m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1012 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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