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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in Figure 4, numeral “20c” is not described in the originally-filed specification (Applicant is cautioned not to add any new matter to the originally-filed specification). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 8-12 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.
In claim 8, lines 12-13, the expression “high-density polyethylene and polypropylene pellets” does not have clear and proper antecedent basis in the claim because there is no prior mention of high-density polyethylene and polypropylene in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrington et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0183861 A1) in combination with Gorin et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0272180 A1) and Noorjahan et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0169758 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Harrington et al (see the entire document, in particular, paragraphs [0002], [0071] and [0081]; Table III B; Figure 2) teaches a process (see paragraph [0002] (processes for producing blends of polymers having propylene-derived units) of Harrington et al), including (a) providing higher melt index thermoplastic polymer having a melt index of from about 1 – 50 g/10 min (see paragraph [0081], Table III B (melt flow rate of 14.65 – 21.37 g/10 min; melt flow rate of 18.1 – 21.43 g/10 min) of Harrington et al); (b) forming the higher melt index thermoplastic polymer into a plurality of higher melt index polymer pellets (see Figure 2, paragraph [0071] (polymer blend is moved by screw extruder 76 through die pack 78, wherein rotating knives 82 cut polymer strands into pellets) of Harrington et al); and (c) after forming the higher melt index thermoplastic polymer into a plurality of higher melt index polymer pellets, devolatilizing the plurality of higher melt index polymer pellets in a devolatilization chamber to produce a plurality of devolatilized higher melt index polymer pellets (see Figure 2, paragraph [0071] (pellets pass through pipe 86 to spin drier 88) of Harrington et al). Harrington et al does not teach (1) providing post-consumer recycled thermoplastic polymer, (2) devolatilization of pellets, or (3) providing a plurality of devolatilized post-consumer thermoplastic polymer pellets for use in at least one of injection molding, compression molding or flexible packaging processes. Gorin et al (see the entire document, in particular, paragraphs [0002], [0015], [0020] and [0047]) teaches a process (see paragraph [0002] (method of removing contaminants from recycled polymers) of Gorin et al), including post-consumer recycled thermoplastic polymer (see paragraphs [0020] (polymers include high-density polyethylene and polypropylene), [0047] (polymers are formed into pellets) and [0017] (polymer is a thermoplastic, such as post-consumer recycled plastic) of Goring et al), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide post-consumer recycled thermoplastic polymer in the process of Harringto et al in view of Gorin et al in order to reuse thermoplastic polymer and recover thermoplastic polymer having a reduced amount of contaminants (see paragraph [0015] of Gorin et al). Noorjahan et al (see the entire document, in particular, paragraphs [0001], [0007], [0030], [0031] and [0082]; Figure 1) teaches a process (see paragraph [0001] (devolatilization process for pellets of ethylene-alpha olefin copolymers) of Noorjahan et al), including devolatilization of pellets and providing a plurality of devolatilized thermoplastic polymer pellets for use in at least one of injection molding, compression molding or flexible packaging processes (see Figure 1, paragraphs [0030] (pellets are provided to devolatilization bin 1 via pellet inlet 2 and exit via pellet exit line 3), [0031] (nitrogen enters devolatilization bin 1 via feed line 4 and exits via line 4a) and [0082] (suitable for multilayer flexible packaging film) of Noorjahan et al), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to devolatilize pellets and provide a plurality of devolatilized thermoplastic polymer pellets for use in at least one of injection molding, compression molding or flexible packaging processes in the process of Harrington et al in view of Noorjahan et al in order to remove hydrocarbon residue from copolymer pellets (see paragraph [0007] of Noorjahan et al) and provide packaging film.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 and 13-20 are allowable over the prior art references currently of record.
Claims 9-12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art references currently of record, alone or in combination, disclose, suggest or teach a process of making post-consumer recycled high-density polyethylene or polypropylene pellets, including (1) identifying and discarding a first portion of a plurality of post-consumer high-density polyethylene and polypropylene flakes having a melt index below about 2 g/10 min such that a remaining portion of the plurality of post-consumer high-density polyethylene and polypropylene flakes has a melt index of between about 2 – 50 g/10 min, and (2) forming the second portion of a plurality of post-consumer high-density polyethylene and polypropylene flakes into a plurality of post-consumer high-density polyethylene and polypropylene pellets (as recite din claim 1). None of the prior art references currently of record, alone or in combination, disclose, suggest or teach a process of making devolatilized post-consumer thermoplastic polymer pellets, including (1) sorting a plurality of recycled polymer according to melt index into a first group of recycled polymer having a first melt index in a first range and a second group of recycled polymer having a second melt index in a second range, (2) forming a first group of recycled polymer into a first group of pellets, (3) forming a second group of recycled polymer into a second group of pellets and (4) separately devolatilizing the first group of pellets and the second group of pellets.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEO B. TENTONI whose telephone number is (571)272-1209. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:00 ET M-F.
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 A. 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.
LEO B. TENTONI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/LEO B TENTONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights