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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 6-7 and 9 are currently pending
Claims 1-5 and 8 were previously canceled
Claim 10 is currently canceled
Claim 6 is currently amendedClaims 6-7 and 9 are currently rejected
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 6-7 and 9 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "filtering said soluble substances-removed carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth” on lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Did Applicant intend to recite “filtering said insoluble substances-removed carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth” instead? Claims 7 and 9 are also rejected since these claims depend on claim 6.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BINDER et al. (U.S. 2017/0362156 A1) (hereinafter “Binder”).
Regarding Claim 6:
Binder teaches a method of producing a carboxylic acid (Examiner’s note: see original specification paragraph 11 – “The term ‘carboxylic acid’ generally refers to a compound having one or a plurality of carboxyl groups in the molecule…Specific examples of preferred carboxylic acids include formic acid, acetic acid, propionic acid…acrylic acid…lactic acid…”. As a result, Examiner is broadly interpreting ‘carboxylic acid’ to include acetic acid, propionic acid, acrylic acid and/or lactic acid) (see paragraphs 1, 14-27 and 42-48), comprising:
(A’) removing insoluble substances (solids and/or cell debris) from a carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth (see FIG. 1A, a lactic acid-containing fermentation broth 20 flows through a solids removal step 23 to further provide a clarified lactic acid-containing fermentation broth 24) (see paragraph 44 – “Various means are well known in the art of processing fermentation broths for removing solids and could accordingly be employed in solids removal step 23, including but not being limited to various forms of filtration, flocculation, settling, centrifugation and the like, however in a preferred embodiment ultrafiltration is used.”) (see paragraphs 42-43 and 45) (see paragraphs 49-50);
(A) filtering said insoluble substances-removed carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth (‘a clarified lactic acid-containing fermentation broth 24’) by passing said insoluble substances-removed carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth (‘a clarified lactic acid-containing fermentation broth 24’) through a nanofiltration membrane (see FIG. 1A, nanofiltration membrane 26) to obtain a carboxylic acid-containing filtrate from a permeate side of said nanofiltration membrane (see FIG. 1A, streams 34a, 34b 36 and/or 38) (see FIG. 1B disclosing another configuration wherein a solvent is used or not used) (see paragraphs 42-44, 46-47 and 49-52) (see paragraph 45 – “Those skilled in the art and familiar with membrane-based gas recovery or separation systems will be well able to select the appropriate membrane system and configuration, but a presently preferred embodiment will employ hydrophilic nanofiltration membranes.”) (see paragraph 50 – “As before, various hydrophilic nanofiltration membrane materials can be used, in various known spatial configurations within the skill of the ordinary practitioner.”); and
(B) mixing said carboxylic acid-containing filtrate obtained in step (A) with an extraction solvent which undergoes the phase separation with said carboxylic acid-containing filtrate (see FIG. 1A, an organic solvent 28 has been added in solvent tank 30 which is supplied via stream 32 to shell side of nanofiltration membrane in step 26) (see FIG. 1A, a settling tank 40, a vaporizer 44 and a dehydration reactor 48 wherein phase separation occurs) (see FIG. 1B disclosing another configuration wherein a solvent is used or not used) (see paragraphs 42-44, 46-47-48 and 49-52), and collecting a carboxylic acid extract phase-separated from the aqueous phase (see FIG. 1A, streams 34a, 34b 36 and/or 38) (see paragraphs 46-47) (see FIG. 1A, a settling tank 40, a vaporizer 44 and a dehydration reactor 48 wherein phase separation occurs) (see paragraphs 47-48) (see paragraphs 51-53 further discussing phase separation);
wherein said carboxylic acid is acetic acid or propionic acid (see FIGS. 3-6 further illustrating acetic acid and/or propionic acid) (see paragraphs 53-55, 60, 66, 68-69, 71, 73 and see Tables 2-3 further describing and illustrating propionic acid).
Although Binder does not explicitly state or recite ‘and to accelerate phase separation between an aqueous phase and an organic phase in step (B)’, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the nanofiltration step in (A) to accelerate phase separation occurring via extraction step in (B) in order to efficiently and effectively separate the filtrate from the unwanted stream (see FIG. 1A, an organic solvent 28 has been added in solvent tank 30 which is supplied via stream 32 to shell side of nanofiltration membrane in step 26) (see paragraphs 46-47).
Regarding Claim 7:
Binder teaches the method according to claim 6, including monitoring/sensing a pH of said carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth and/or said carboxylic acid-containing filtrate (see paragraphs 88-91 further illustrating a pH). Although Binder does not explicitly teach wherein said carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth and/or said carboxylic acid-containing filtrate is adjusted to a pH of 4.5 or less, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the pH of said carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth and/or said carboxylic acid-containing filtrate to be 4.5 or less, in order to efficiently and effectively separate the carboxylic acid from the broth (see paragraphs 88-91 further illustrating a pH) (see paragraphs 1, 14-27 and 42-48).
Regarding Claim 9:
Binder teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein said step of removing the insoluble substances is a step of passing said carboxylic acid-containing fermentation broth through a microfiltration membrane (see FIG. 1A, a lactic acid-containing fermentation broth 20 flows through a solids removal step 23 to further provide a clarified lactic acid-containing fermentation broth 24) (see paragraph 44 – “Various means are well known in the art of processing fermentation broths for removing solids and could accordingly be employed in solids removal step 23, including but not being limited to various forms of filtration, flocculation, settling, centrifugation and the like, however in a preferred embodiment ultrafiltration is used.”) (see paragraphs 42-43 and 45) (see paragraphs 49-50). Although Binder does not explicitly recite ‘a microfiltration membrane’, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skilled in the art to substitute the ultrafiltration in the solids removal step 23 with a microfiltration membrane to achieve the same desirable result of removing and filtering unwanted contaminants and debris from a fluid source (see paragraph 44 – “Various means are well known in the art of processing fermentation broths for removing solids and could accordingly be employed in solids removal step 23, including but not being limited to various forms of filtration, flocculation, settling, centrifugation and the like, however in a preferred embodiment ultrafiltration is used.”) (see paragraphs 42-43 and 45) (see paragraphs 49-50).
Other References Considered
Mattison, Phillip L. et al. (EP 0247436 A1) (hereinafter “Mattison”) teaches a process for recovery of amino acid from aqueous mixtures.
KAWAMURA KENJI et al. (JP 2010126512 A) (hereinafter “Kawa”) teaches a method for producing hydroxycarboxylic acid.
Sawai et al. (U.S. 2011/0263811 A1) (hereinafter “Sawai”) teaches a method for producing lactic acid and method for producing polylactic acid.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive and have been addressed above in the updated rejection (see above).
The previous claim objections have been considered and are now withdrawn as a result of the current claim amendments.
The previous 112(a) claim rejection regarding claim 6 has been considered and is now withdrawn as a result of the current claim amendment.
The previous 112(b) claim rejection regarding claim 6 has been considered and is now updated (see above).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKASH K. VARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-9627. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 pm.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571)-272-0475. 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.
/AKASH K VARMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773