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 .
Claim Term Meaning
As stated previously, in the claims of the instant invention “between” is given its plain meaning and is understood to mean numbers greater than the low number and lower than the high number {i.e. A is between 1 and 10 = 1<A<10}.
Claims have been examined in accordance with this claim term meaning.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 2 sets forth alternatives designed to further define aspects from claim 1. However, alternative (a), (d) and (j) define selections that extend beyond the limitations encompassed by the recitations of claims 1, and, therefore, claim 2 fails to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 35-46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chemtob(3,567,369).
Chemtob discloses an insoluble cross-linked copolymer of an aromatic hydrocarbon monomer having a vinyl group and a cross-linking agent containing at least 2 vinyl groups, the cross-linking agent present in 0.5-50% mol of the other monomer, the copolymer having attached to the aromatic nuclei thereof groups C,H2,-N(R)-Z where n is integer of 1-4, R is monovalent hydrocarbon group, X is Cl or Br, Z is sorbityl, mannityl, galactityl, talityl, arabityl or ribityl radicals derived from polyhydroxyalkyl amines (column 1, line 71 - column 2, line 23); such an copolymer is useful as a boron specific resin, which may be contacted with boron-containing brine to load the resin with borates and then eluting the loaded resin with water to remove the borates (column 1, lines 24-30). From the standpoints of economy, ease of preparation and the properties of the resinous adsorbent, it is preferred to employ N-methyl glucamine as the polyhydroxyalkyl amine (column 3, lines 26-34). The preparation procedure includes preparing a cross-linked copolymer of a monovinyl hydrocarbon and a cross-linking agent containing two or more non-conjugated vinylidene groups (column 3, line 56 - column 4, line 6), followed by haloalkylation (column 4, lines 28-32) and reaction of the amine with the haloalkylated copolymer (column 4, lines 51-71). Regarding the porosity features of these claims, owing to the closeness of the material make-ups of the products formed, the fact that the products are crosslinked and that they are directed towards ion exchange materials, it is held that they would inherently be porous and accordingly, microporous to any degree that may be required by the claims. Regarding the product-by-process features of the claims, owing to the closeness of the material make-ups of the products disclosed and the fact that the products of Chemtob are concerned with adorbing/recovering materials from brine, it is not seen that difference in the product as claimed is evident based on the manner in which they are claimed to be formed, and burden is rightly shifted to applicants to come forward with evidence establishing patentable difference between the claimed product and the prior art product {see, also, In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 798, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (MPEP § 2113)}.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments have been considered. However, rejections as set forth above are maintained.
Rejection under 35USC112 4th paragraph is maintained as now set forth in light of applicants’ amendments to the claims. Applicants make no arguments to specifically address positions of this rejection. Accordingly, no further response is required at this time.
Regarding rejection under 35USC102, applicants’ arguments have been considered. However, rejection is maintained as set forth above. Applicants’ claims do not distinguish through limitation over additional elements that may be included the adsorbent materials of Chemtob and/or treatments that may be performed on the adsorbent materials of Chemtob. Further, Chemtob’s fully considered teachings include both the formed products prior to further treatment, as well as after further treatment. Additionally, in that applicants’ claims are directed towards a product, these claims are not distinguished by the number of steps or other process operations utilized to form the products of the claims and/or reference without distinction being identified in the product of the claim itself. In this regard, the rejected claims are not limited to the materials and pore diameters discussed on response. The rejected claims are directed towards “a microporous polymeric adsorbent material” with no specific requirement regarding pore diameters. Also, there is no requirement that the product of the rejected claims be a cryogel, and burden is upon applicants to demonstrate, in fact, that the “microporous polymeric adsorbent materials” of the claims are distinguished from the adsorbent products of Chemtob based on the manner in which they are formed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 13 and 14 are allowed.
Claim 47 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 1, 13 and 14, the prior art, including Chemtob(3,567,369) taken alone or in combination with Mattiasson et al.(2011/0117596) or other prior art, is insufficient in its teaching or fair suggestion of microporous polymeric adsorbent materials as defined by these claims that are in the form of or manufactured as a cryogel and have pores of the diameter as required by these claims.
Regarding claim 47, the prior art, including Chemtob(3,567,369) taken alone or in combination with Mattiasson et al.(2011/0117596) or other prior art, is insufficient in its teaching or fair suggestion of microporous polymeric adsorbent materials as defined by these claims that include the additionally recited polymerizable monomers set forth by this claim.
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John Cooney whose telephone number is 571-272-1070. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9 to 6. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Jones, can be reached on 571-270-7733. 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).
/JOHN M COONEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765