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 .
Support for the amendments is within the instant application specification.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed on 11/26/2025 in response to the Non-Final Rejection mailed on 5/30/2025 is acknowledged. This listing of claims replaces all prior listings of claims in the application.
Claims 1-13, 15-28 are pending.
Claim 14 is cancelled.
Applicant’s remarks filed on 5/30/2025 in response to the Non-Final Rejection mailed on 11/26/2025 have been fully considered and are deemed persuasive to overcome at least one of the rejections and/or objections as previously applied.
The text of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code not included in the instant action can be found in the prior Office Action.
Withdrawn Claim Objections
The objection to claim 1 because of the following informalities the recitation ‘at least part of solid biomass’ is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment of claim 1 to remove said recitation.
The objection to claim 3 because of the following informalities: ‘....’ is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment to remove the additional period.
The objection to claim 10 because of the following informalities: ‘combination of hard anion’ is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment of claim 10 to remove the recitation.
Withdrawn Claim Rejections
The rejection of claims 1, 15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment of claim 1 to remove the additional period and claim 15 to remove the recitation ‘a peak similar to.’
Maintained 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 rejection of claims 1-13, 15-27 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Liszka et al (2016, WO 2016/070125 A1, Date Filed: 30 October 2015, Date Published: 6 May 2016, cited on PTO-892 filed 1/9/2024) {herein Liszka} in view of Sun et al (2014, Available online 30 January 2014. Green Chemistry. 10.1039/c3gc42401d, cited on IDS filed 4/13/2022) {herein Sun} as evidenced by PubChem dodecanedioic acid (Date Available: May 20, 2025, PubChem, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein PubChem dodecanedioic acid), PubChem Lite (2025, PubChemLit Exposomics, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein PubChem Lite}, Alkene (2009, Style and Usage for Organic Chemistry, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein Alkene}, Choi et al (2022, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein Choi}, Chemical Book Choline (20203, Chemical Book, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein Chemical Book Choline}, Tsurko et al (2015, Journal of Molecular Liquids, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein Tsurko} is maintained. The rejection has been modified in view of new claim 26 and Applicant’s amendment of claim 1 to recite having the chemical structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
61
85
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein R consists…’ As amended, claims 1-13, 15-27 are drawn to a method to deconstruct a biomass: the method comprising: (a) introducing a solvent comprising a plurality of salt ionic liquid (PSIL) to a biomass to dissolve at least part of a solid biomass in the solvent to form a solubilized biomass mixture; wherein the PSIL is an organic salt comprising three or more different ions, and the PSIL comprises: (i) a hard anion ionic liquid (IL) and a soft anion IL, (ii) at least one IL having a pKa value of equal to or higher than 10, or (iii) at least one IL has a low hydrogen bond donor ability, wherein the PSIL comprises a long chain fatty acid having the chemical structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
61
85
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein R consists: (1) an alkyl or alkenyl chain of 8 or more carbon atoms, (2) zero or more C=C double bonds, and (3) zero or more amine groups, and the PSIL has a size to charge ratio of equal to or more than about 150 g/mol:1 charge; and (b) introducing an enzyme and/or a microbe to the solubilized biomass mixture such that the enzyme and/or microbe produces a sugar from the solubilized biomass mixture.
With respect to claims 1, 20, 21-27 Liszka teaches a method wherein an ionic liquid solution comprised of a dicarboxylic acid anion and a cation are used for the deconstruction of a biomass for the production of a sugar composition (abstract, para 0004). The ionic liquids used in the methods of the invention can be prepared by combining a dicarboxylic acid, or a salt thereof, with a salt containing the cation to be incorporated into the ionic liquid (para 0071). Absent evidence otherwise, it is the Examiner’s position that said ionic liquid to be a plurality of salt ionic liquid (PSIL) as it is comprised of more than one salt. The dicarboxylic acid is selected from dodecanedioic acid (para 0064). Evidentiary reference of PubChem dodecanedioic acid is cited to demonstrate that dodecanedioic acid is comprised of a main carbon chain of 12 carbons, no C=C double bond (page 1) which has the chemical structure of
PNG
media_image1.png
61
85
media_image1.png
Greyscale
. Evidentiary reference of PubChem Lite is cited to demonstrate that dodecanedioic acid has a mass to charge ratio (m/z) that varies between, 231g/mol:1 to 289g/mol:1, depending on the conditions (page 4). The dicarboxylic acid can be substituted with one to three amino groups (para 0063). Examiner is interpreting the amino group to be an amine group since it contains a nitrogen and hydrogen. The amino groups can be on the same carbon atom or on different carbon atoms in the dicarboxylic acid (para 0063). As such, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that an amine group could be added to dodecanedioic acid, as taught by Liszka. In general, the dicarboxylic acid is a C3-16 alkane-dioic acid or a C3-16 alkene-dioic acid which is branched or unbranched (para 0063). Evidentiary reference of Alkene is cited to demonstrate that alkenes have at least one carbon to carbon double bond (page 1). As such, Examiner is interpreting C3-16 alkene-dioic to have at least once double bond. Liszka further teaches adding an enzyme to the dissolved biomass thereby forming a sugar composition (para 0117).
With respect to claim 2, Liszka teaches a method where 1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazolium acetate is also a cation used within the PSIL (reference claim 6). It is well known in the art that 1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazolium acetate is a double salt ionic liquid since it is comprised of more than one cation or anion.
With respect to claim 3, Liszka teaches a method wherein imidazolium is a cation within the ionic liquid (paragraph 0069) and carboxylic acid is an anion within the ionic liquid (paragraph 0079). It would be inherent to one skilled in the art that Liszka teaches the components of the claimed formula ‘[aCl+bC2+.......+zCn][aA1+ A2+ ... +wA1+(1-a- -...-w)A]’ since the organic cation, C, is imidazolium, (paragraph 0069) and a hard anion as demonstrated by the evidentiary reference of Choi which is recited to demonstrate that imidazolium is a hard ion (page 1616, column 1, para 1) and A, is carboxylic acid (paragraph 0079). Since there is at least one organic cation and hard anion present, the claim of ‘a, b, ... and z are independently a number from about 0 to 20; and a sum of a, b, ... and z is greater than 0; a sum of a + R + ... + o is a number greater than zero’ is met.
With respect to claim 4, Liszka teaches a method wherein imidazolium is a cation within the ionic liquid (paragraph 0069) and carboxylic acid is an anion within the ionic liquid (paragraph 0079). It would be inherent to one skilled in the art that Liszka teaches the components of the claimed formula ‘[aCl+bC2+.......+zCn][aA1+ A2+ ... +wA1+(1-a- -...-w)A].’ Since the organic cation, C, is imidazolium (paragraph 0069) and the hard anion, A, is carboxylic acid (paragraph 0079). Since there is at least one organic cation and hard anion present, the claim of ‘a, b, ... and z are independently a number from about 0 to 20; and a sum of a, b, ... and z is greater than 0; a sum of a + R + ... + o is a number greater than zero’ is met.
With respect to claim 5, Liszka teaches a method wherein the pH of a mixture containing the dissolved polysaccharide can be reduced by adding dicarboxylic acid and acetic acid (paragraph 0105). In certain embodiments, the dicarboxylic acid utilized is the same as the one used on the ionic liquid (IL) (paragraph 0105).
With respect to claim 7, Liszka teaches a method wherein the ionic liquid solution is at a temperature ranging from about 100C to about 120C (paragraph 0102).
With respect to claims 8 and 9, Liszka teaches a method wherein salt ionic liquids are environmentally friendly solvents that solubilize crystalline cellulose and biomass (paragraph 0004). Said ionic liquid contains a cation within the salt ionic liquid (paragraph 0069) and carboxylic acid is an anion within the ionic liquid (paragraph 0079). In addition, said solvent is suitable at temperatures ranging from about 20C to about 200C (paragraph 0102). Examiner is interpreting that since the components and conditions of the ionic liquid are the same as to the instant application claims of ‘at a solvent… a temperature about 90C’ (claim 8) and ‘a solvent… at a temperature about 25C’ (claim 9) it would be inherent that said salt ionic liquid taught by Liszka would have similar viscosities as claimed in the instant application.
With respect to claim 10, Liszka teaches a method wherein salt ionic liquids are environmentally friendly solvents that solubilize crystalline cellulose and biomass (paragraph 0004). Said salt ionic liquid contains a cation within the salt ionic liquid (paragraph 0069) and carboxylic acid is an anion within the salt ionic liquid (paragraph 0079). In addition, said solvent is suitable at temperatures ranging from about 20C to about 200C (paragraph 0102). Since Liszka teaches the same hard anion of acetate (paragraph 0136 and figure 1) as a component of the salt ionic liquid, it would inherently have hydrogen bond basicity equal to or less than 0.25 at about 90C as in the instant application. Since the Office does not have the facilities for examining and comparing applicant’s claim limitations with the identical disclosure in the prior art, the burden is on the applicant to show a novel or unobvious difference between the recited product and the recited product of the prior art (i.e., that the method of the prior art does not possess the same characteristics of the recited method). See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977) and In re Fitzgerald et al., 205 USPQ 594.
With respect to claim 11, Liszka teaches a method wherein a polysaccharide biomass is at least partially broken down by a plurality of salt ionic liquid (PSIL); wherein the ionic liquid contains water, dicarboxylic acid anion and a cation (abstract). It is well known by those skilled in the art that dicarboxylic acid acetate is an organic salt. A cation within the PSIL can be choline (paragraph 0044). Evidentiary reference of Chemical Book Choline is cited to demonstrate that choline has a pKa of 13.9 (page 1). Furthermore, Liszka teaches a method wherein acetate is a hard anion ionic liquid utilized for deconstruction of the biomass (paragraph 0136 and Figure 1). In addition, Liszka teaches 1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazolium acetate is a cation used within the PSIL (reference claim 6).
With respect to claim 12, Liszka teaches a method wherein a polysaccharide biomass is at least partially broken down by a plurality of salt ionic liquid (PSIL); wherein the ionic liquid contains water, dicarboxylic acid anion and a cation (abstract). It is well known by those skilled in the art that dicarboxylic acid acetate is an organic salt. A cation within the PSIL can be choline (paragraph 0044). Evidentiary reference of Chemical Book Choline is cited to demonstrate that choline has a pKa of 13.9 (page 1). Furthermore, Liszka teaches a method wherein acetate is a hard anion ionic liquid utilized for deconstruction of the biomass (paragraph 0136 and Figure 1). In addition, Liszka teaches 1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazolium acetate is a cation used within the PSIL (reference claim 6).
With respect to claim 13, Liszka teaches a method wherein a mixture including polysaccharide biomass and a salt ionic liquid solution, wherein the salt ionic liquid solution contains water and a salt ionic liquid, and wherein the salt ionic liquid contains a dicarboxylic acid anion and a cation (abstract). Examiner is interpreting the lack of teaching of a capping agent to be equivalent to the lack of one being added to the biomass by Liszka.
With respect to claim 15, it is noted that the recitation of “wherein the method produces a peak similar to that for untreated or pine biomass for the molecule:
PNG
media_image2.png
73
224
media_image2.png
Greyscale
” is a “product-by-process” claim limitation. MPEP 2113 states “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. 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 (Fed. Cir. 1985).” As such, the product obtained by the combination of the teachings of the above references would result in the same product as claimed.
With respect to claim 16, Liszka teaches a method wherein a polysaccharide biomass is at least partially broken down by a plurality of salt ionic liquid (PSIL); wherein the ionic liquid contains water, dicarboxylic acid anion and a cation (abstract). It is well known by those skilled in the art that dicarboxylic acid acetate is an organic salt. A cation within the PSIL can be choline (paragraph 0044). Evidentiary reference of Chemical Book Choline is cited to demonstrate that choline has a pKa of 13.9 (page 1). Furthermore, Liszka teaches a method wherein acetate is a hard anion ionic liquid utilized for deconstruction of the biomass (paragraph 0136 and Figure 1). In addition, Liszka teaches 1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazolium acetate is a cation used within the PSIL (reference claim 6).
With respect to claim 17, Liszka teaches organic-phase sugar extraction from ionic liquids (para 0130). In addition, Liszka teaches separation techniques including, but not limited to, distillation, azeotropic distillation, membrane separation, and adsorption onto solid adsorbents are known to those of skill in the art and can be used to separate the fermentation medium from the fermentation products (para 0128). Examiner is interpreting sugar to be a fermentation product.
With respect to claim 18, Liszka teaches Liszka teaches an ionic liquid having glutamic acid dianions and two choline cations for each of the glutamic acid dianions (para 0046). Examiner is interpreting said recitation to be indicative of the ionic liquid containing 3 or more ions with glutamic acid dianions and two choline cation being 3 ions. Furthermore, an ionic liquid having succinic acid dianions and two choline cations for each of the succinic acid dianions (para 0046). Examiner is interpreting said recitation to be indicative of the ionic liquid containing 3 or more ions with succinic acid dianions and two choline cation being 3 ions. Examiner is interpreting Liszka as teaches 6 ions within the ionic liquid.
With respect to claim 19, Liszka teaches a method wherein a cation within the PSIL can be choline (paragraph 0044). Liszka teaches choline hydroxide is a composition of the ionic liquid (para 0132). Evidentiary reference of Chemical Book Choline is cited to demonstrate that choline has a pKa of 13.9 (page 1). As such, examiner is interpreting choline hydroxide as a hard anion. The ionic liquid may also contain glutamate (para 0082). Evidentiary reference of Tsurko is cited to demonstrate that glutamate is a soft anion (page 119, column 1, para 2). As such, Examiner is interpreting glutamate to be a soft anion.
However, Liszka does not teach wherein the PSIL is an organic salt comprising three or more different ions (claim 1). X is a number from about 0.01 to 0.99 (claim 4). The method of claim 3, wherein the amino acid is a lysine or glycine (claim 6). Biomass mixture producing fewer guaiacol and/or derivatives thereof, compared to a pretreatment using only one salt ionic liquid (claims 11-12). A peak similar to that for untreated (claim 15). equal to or more than 50% of the lignin in the solubilized biomass mixture has a molecular weight within a range of 1000 to 15000 Da (claim 16).
With respect to claim 1, Sun teaches a method wherein four ionic liquids comprised of two cations, 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium ([C2mim]+) and cholinium ([Ch]+), and one of two anions,
acetate ([OAc]−) and lysinate ([Lys]−) were used to pretreat a biomass (abstract) for the production of sugars (page 2547, column 1, paras 1 and 2). The highest cellulose solubilities are obtained
using 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate ([C2mim][OAc]), which has a minimal impact on the environment and low toxicity to animals and humans (page 2546, column 1, para 1).
With respect to claim 6, Sun teaches a method wherein lysine was utilized within the ionic liquid (page 2556, column 2, paragraph 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Liszka in view of Sun because Sun teaches a method wherein four ionic liquids comprised of two cations, 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium ([C2mim]+) and cholinium ([Ch]+), and one of two anions, acetate ([OAc]−) and lysinate ([Lys]−) were used to pretreat a biomass (abstract) for the production of sugars (page 2547, column 1, paras 1 and 2). While, Liszka teaches a method wherein an ionic liquid solution comprised of a dicarboxylic acid anion and a cation are used for the deconstruction of a biomass for the production of a sugar composition (abstract, para 0004).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to either use the teachings of Liszka by itself or combine the teachings of Liszka and Sun because Sun provides the motivation for one of ordinary skill in that art to use three or more different ions within the ionic salt solution to pretreat a biomass for the production of sugar as Sun teaches four different ionic liquids of two cations, 1-ethyl-methylimidazolium ([C2mim]+) and cholinium ([Ch]+), and one of two anions, acetate ([OAc]−) and lysinate ([Lys]−) was effective in pretreating a biomass (abstract). Pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass typically resulted in fast biomass solubilization and high delignification efficiency (page 2549, column 1, para 3). One of ordinary skill in the art knowing the benefit of fast and efficient biomass solubilization based on the teachings of Liszka and Sun would have a reasonable expectation of success to combine both a method for deconstructing a biomass with a method wherein a salt ionic solution comprising three or more different ions because one of ordinary skill in the art would expect both methods to increase the yield of solubilized biomass and reduce the time and costs associated with said methods as the time associated with the process of solubilizing the biomass would be reduced.
One of skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success to make and use the claimed method for pretreating a biomass for sugar production because Liszka provides the basic method of pretreating a biomass for the production of sugar using ionic liquids. Reference of Sun provides the teaching of a method wherein 4 ionic liquids are used to pretreat a biomass for the production of sugar. Therefore there would be a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the above invention. Therefore, the above invention would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
With respect to claim 4, since the methods of Liszka in view of Sun are identical to the instant application, it would be inherent to yield the same results of claim 4 of X being a number from about 0.01 to 0.99. Since the Office does not have the facilities for examining and comparing applicant’s claim limitations with the identical disclosure in the prior art, the burden is on the applicant to show a novel or unobvious difference between the recited product and the recited product of the prior art (i.e., that the method of the prior art does not possess the same characteristics of the recited method). See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977) and In re Fitzgerald et al., 205 USPQ 594.
With respect to claims 11-12, since the methods of Liszka in view of Sun are identical to the instant application, it would inherently yield the same results of claim 11 of the biomass mixture producing fewer guaiacol and/or derivatives thereof, compared to a pretreatment using only one salt ionic liquid. Since the Office does not have the facilities for examining and comparing applicant’s claim limitations with the identical disclosure in the prior art, the burden is on the applicant to show a novel or unobvious difference between the recited product and the recited product of the prior art (i.e., that the method of the prior art does not possess the same characteristics of the recited method). See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977) and In re Fitzgerald et al., 205 USPQ 594.
With respect to claim 16 since the methods of Liszka in view of Sun are identical to the instant application, it would inherently yield the same results of claim 16 of the instant application of equal to or more than 50% of the lignin in the solubilized biomass mixture has a molecular weight within a range of 1000 to 15000 Da. Since the Office does not have the facilities for examining and comparing applicant’s claim limitations with the identical disclosure in the prior art, the burden is on the applicant to show a novel or unobvious difference between the recited product and the recited product of the prior art (i.e., that the method of the prior art does not possess the same characteristics of the recited method). See In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977) and In re Fitzgerald et al., 205 USPQ 594.
RESPONSE TO REMARKS: Beginning on p. 7 of Applicant’s remarks, Applicant in summary contends that Liszka et al. disclosing using a dicarboxylic acid which has two carboxyl functional groups; while, in contrast, Claim 1 recites the use of a long chain fatty acid having the chemical structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
61
85
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein R consists: (1) an alkyl oralkenyl chain of 8 or more carbon atoms, (2) zero or more C=C double bonds, and (3) zero or more amine groups, which means the long chain fatty acid only has one carboxyl functional group. Applicant contends that Liszka et al. and Sun et al. do not teach, suggest, or motivate a long chain fatty acid having the chemical structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
61
85
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein R consists: (1) an alkyl or alkenyl chain of 8 or more carbon atoms, (2) zero or more C=C double bonds, and (3) zero or more amine groups.
This argument is found to be not persuasive in view of the modified rejection. Examiner contends that , , absent evidence otherwise, it is the Examiner’s position that dodecanedioic acid , taught by Liszka is the same as ‘having the chemical structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
61
85
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein R consists: (1) an alkyl or alkenyl chain of 8 or more carbon atoms, (2) zero or more C=C double bonds, and (3) zero or more amine groups,’ recited in the instant application claim 1 as the claim language is not limited to only one carboxyl group. Examiner contends that Sun was relied upon to provide motivation for Liszka to utilize different ionic liquids of two cations, 1-ethyl-methylimidazolium ([C2mim]+) and cholinium ([Ch]+), and one of two anions, acetate ([OAc]−) and lysinate ([Lys]−) as they were effective in pretreating a biomass (abstract) as the pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass with the ionic liquids typically resulted in fast biomass solubilization and high delignification efficiency (page 2549, column 1, para 3).
New 103 Rejection
Claim 28 is newly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Liszka et al (2016, WO 2016/070125 A1, Date Filed: 30 October 2015, Date Published: 6 May 2016, cited on PTO-892 filed 1/9/2024) {herein Liszka} in view of Sun et al (2014, Available online 30 January 2014. Green Chemistry. 10.1039/c3gc42401d, cited on IDS filed 4/13/2022) {herein Sun} as applied to claims 1-13, 15-27 in further view of Sugiura et al (Date Published: October 13, 2020, PNAS, Examiner cited) {herein Sugiura} as evidenced by PubChem dodecanedioic acid (Date Available: May 20, 2025, PubChem, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein PubChem dodecanedioic acid), PubChem Lite (2025, PubChemLit Exposomics, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein PubChem Lite}, Alkene (2009, Style and Usage for Organic Chemistry, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein Alkene}, Choi et al (2022, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein Choi}, Chemical Book Choline (20203, Chemical Book, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein Chemical Book Choline}, Tsurko et al (2015, Journal of Molecular Liquids, cited on PTO-892 dated 5/30/2025) {herein Tsurko}. The new rejection is necessitated by new claim 28.
New claim 28 is drawn to the method of claim 27, wherein the long chain fatty acid is caprate, laurate, myristate, palmitate, stearate, arachidate, behenate, lignocerate, or cerotate.
The teachings of Liszka in view of Sun as applied to claims 1-13, 15-27 are setforth in the 103 rejection above.
However, Liszka in view of Sun do not teach wherein the long chain fatty acid is caprate, laurate, myristate, palmitate, stearate, arachidate, behenate, lignocerate, or cerotate (claim 28).
With respect to claim 28, Sugiura teaches a method wherein myristate is used as a carbon source for fungi (abstract).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Liszka of a method wherein an ionic liquid solution comprised of a dicarboxylic acid anion and a cation are used for the deconstruction of a biomass for the production of a sugar composition (abstract, para 0004) or combine the teachings of Sun and Sugiura because Sun teaches a method wherein four ionic liquids comprised of two cations, 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium ([C2mim]+) and cholinium ([Ch]+), and one of two anions,
acetate ([OAc]−) and lysinate ([Lys]−) were used to pretreat a biomass (abstract) for the production of sugars (page 2547, column 1, paras 1 and 2). Whereas Sugiura teaches a method wherein myristate is used as a carbon source for fungi (abstract).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to either use the teachings of Liszka et al. by itself or combine the teachings of Sun and Sugiura because Sugiura provides the motivation for Liszka to utilize myristate as a carbon source since myristate increases the biomass of fungi (abstract) by serving as a carbon and energy source (page41, column 1, para 1). One of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success that adding myristate as the fatty acid for the degradation of a biomass would be advantageous as Sugiura teaches myristate boosts the growth of fungi while also serving as a carbon and energy source (page 41, column 1, para 1 and abstract).
One of skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success to make and use the claimed myristate because Liszka provides a method wherein an ionic liquid solution comprised of a dicarboxylic acid anion and a cation are used for the deconstruction of a biomass for the production of a sugar composition (abstract, para 0004). Sun teaches a method wherein four ionic liquids comprised of two cations, 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium ([C2mim]+) and cholinium ([Ch]+), and one of two anions,
acetate ([OAc]−) and lysinate ([Lys]−) were used to pretreat a biomass (abstract) for the production of sugars (page 2547, column 1, paras 1 and 2). Whereas Sugiura teaches a method wherein myristate is used as a carbon source for fungi (abstract). Therefore there would be a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the above invention. Therefore, the above invention would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
RESPONSE TO REMARKS: Applicants remarks filed on 11/26/2025 have been fully considered; however, they are rendered moot in view of the new rejection set forth above, which is necessitated by Applicants’ amendment to the claims. Examiner contends that Sugiura provides the motivation for Liszka to utilize myristate as a carbon source for the fungi utilized by Liszka for the deconstruction of a biomass.
Conclusion
Status of claims
Claims 1-13, 15-28 are pending.
Claim 14 is cancelled.
Claims 1-13, 15-28 are rejected.
No claims are in condition for allowance.
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 ERICA NICOLE JONES-FOSTER whose telephone number is (571)270-0360. The examiner can normally be reached mf 7:30a - 4:30p.
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, Manjunath Rao can be reached at 571-272-0939. 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.
/ERICA NICOLE JONES-FOSTER/Examiner, Art Unit 1656
/MANJUNATH N RAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1656