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 . 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.
Priority
The instant application is a 371 of PCT/EP2020/070323 filed on 07/17/2020, which also claims foreign priority to French application no. FR1908136 filed on 07/18/2019. The certified copy of the foreign priority application filed on 01/14/2022 in the instant application is acknowledged.
Status of the Claims
The claim amendments and remarks filed on 08/19/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 5-8 are amended.
Accordingly, claims 1-20 are pending and being examined on the merits herein.
Withdrawn Objections/Rejections
The objection to the drawings is withdrawn in view of the replacement Fig. 3 filed on 08/19/2025 having sufficient resolution and legibility.
The 35 USC 112(a) rejection for claims 5-8 are withdrawn in view of the removal of the “prevent” and “preventing” terms.
Withdrawn Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4 and 9-20 were previously indicated as allowable in the office action dated 05/29/2025. However, upon reconsideration, claims 1-9, 12-15, and 17-19 are rejected with new rejections set forth below. Claims 10-11, 16, and 20 are objected 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 9-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9 recites “… Col-2 colloids surface and covalently bonded with an agent … “, which should be changed to “Col-2 colloids surface that is covalently bonded with an agent” for better grammar.
Claim 10 recites “… Col-2 colloids are platinum colloids of zero oxidation state, surface and covalently bonded with an agent … “, which should be changed to “and surface that is covalently bonded with an agent” for better grammar.
Appropriate correction is required.
New Rejections Not Necessitated by the Amendments filed on 08/19/2025
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “A three-dimensional bipolymeric matrix … combining: - a first polymeric network comprising first colloids (Col-1) non-covalently bonded to an unsulfated crosslinked polysaccharide; and – a second crosslinked polymeric network comprising second colloids (Col-2) bonded covalently or non-covalently with a sulfated polysaccharide.”
The specification provides support for forming a three-dimensional biopolymer in Example 1-6 of the instant specification. Applicant demonstrates in Examples 1-5 (pages 18-20) the formation of the two recited colloid polymeric networks. Applicant then demonstrates in Example 6 (see page 21) the manufacturing process of the 3D bipolymeric matrix, in which two solutions (A) and (B) were mixed in a proportion of 4/5 of solution (A) and 1/5 of solution (B). Applicant states that solution (A) comprises the cerium colloids of Example 1, alginate, calcium carbonate, the platinum colloid of Example 2 or 4, and water. Applicant states that solution (B) comprises native (unmodified) aphanothece sacrum polysaccharide and gluconolactone dispersed in water. Applicant states that after mixing the two solutions, the three-dimensional bipolymeric matrix is formed in a few minutes by entanglement of the two polymeric networks.
, Claim 1 recites combining two polymeric networks together and does not recite additional components such as a source of bivalent metals, an agent capable of positively charging the colloid, and an acidifer in order to form the recited “three-dimensional bipolymeric matrix”. As described above, Applicant only provides disclosure of forming a 3D matrix using these additional components and has not disclosed the formation of a 3D matrix by simply mixing the two polymeric networks without additional components. Therefore, Applicant has not provided sufficient structural limitations in claim 1 in order to form the recited three-dimensional biopolymeric matrix.
Furthermore, the state of the art indicates that the formation of spatially resolved multi-component hydrogels is complex, requires a trigger step to form the gel, and that the desired final assembly state may not necessarily form from simply mixing two polymeric components together.
For Example, Draper (in PTO-892) teaches that building multicomponents networks requires control of each component fibres and their assembled structures in space (see first paragraph left column page 848). Draper teaches that this process is already difficult for a single-component system, in which there are few reliable design rules, and further teaches it is becoming increasingly clear that the process of self-assembly is critical to the final gel properties (see first paragraph left column page 848).
Draper illustrates in Figure 1 on page 484, a schematic of the assembly process of a multicomponent based gel. Draper teaches that the spatially resolved multicomponent gel is formed in a three-stage process in which both gelators at triggered to form a fibrous network at their respective pKa values by slowly lowering the pH using an acidifier, leading to a sequential assembly and self-sorted gel. Here, Draper teaches and demonstrates that the assembly of multicomponent gels require a certain trigger step to form the assembly such as slowly acidifying the multi-polymer solution.
Furthermore, Draper 2 (in PTO-892) teaches that when two gelator components are mixed, there are a range of possibilities that can occur as seen in Figure 1 on page 3396. Draper 2 teaches that preparing gels from mixtures of two low molecular weight gelators (LMWG) is relatively straightforward if the triggering method is the same for both. However, Draper 2 teaches that the complexity that can be achieved from even a two-component system is high (see first paragraph under section “Conclusions” on page 3404). Draper 2 teaches that the simple statement that two LMWG form a specific type of assembly is often extremely difficult to prove across all length scales (see first paragraph under section “Conclusions” on page 3404).
Therefore, based on the state of the art and examples demonstrated by Applicant, the scope of claim 1 is not fully supported by the instant disclosure and does not reasonably convey to one skilled in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention because Applicant has only demonstrated the formation of the recited three-dimensional bipolymeric matrix using additional components such as an acidifier. Furthermore, the state of the art suggests that the mixing of two polymer components may not necessarily result in the formation of a desired assembly state, and that careful consideration of component properties and triggering method is needed to form the gel matrix.
Claim 2-8 and 17-18 depend from claim 1, but do not overcome the described written description issue. It is noted that the claims directed toward a method of producing a three-dimensional biopolymeric matrix (claims 9-16) have sufficient written description supported by the Examples in the instant disclosure because these claims recite additional structural limitations such as a source of bivalent metals, an agent capable of positively charging the colloid, and an acidifer in order to form the recited “three-dimensional bipolymeric matrix.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9, 12-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talsma et al. (US20100074932A1 in PTO-892 dated 02/24/2025) in view of Cornwell et al. (JACS, 2015 in PTO-892), Nunamaker et al. (Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2007 in PTO-892), and Vachon et al. (US20160030476A1 in PTO-892 dated 02/24/2025).
Talsma et al. teaches antimicrobial compositions comprising polymer compositions containing colloids including salts of one or more oligodynamic metals, such as gallium that are useful for allowing antimicrobial release profiles to be tailored for a given application and providing for sustained antimicrobial activity over time (see Abstract). Talsma et al. discloses that their antimicrobial compositions are useful for providing topical protection, deodorization (e.g. of wounds or ulcers), and treating ulcers, slowly granulating wounds, vaginitis, fistulas, dermatitis, or popodermatitis (see paragraph 0170).
Talsma et al. teaches the one or more oligodynamic metals of the colloids may be silver, platinum, gold, zinc, copper, cerium, osmium, or mixtures thereof (see paragraph 0009). Talsma et al. also discloses that additional salts of other metals may be added to form the colloid including salt cations such as calcium, sodium, lithium, aluminum, magnesium, potassium, manganese, and the like (see paragraph 0084), which meets the limitation of bivalent metals. Talsma et al. discloses that these salts may also include anions such as carbonates and among others (see paragraph 0084). Talsma discloses that the colloids can be formed first and then added to the polymer composition or can be formed in situ in the composition comprising the polymer (see paragraph 0075). Talsma teaches that the composition may have upper and/or lower ranges or values of greater than zero, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50% or greater (based on weight of total solids in the composition) of the one or more oligodynamic metal salts (see paragraph 0089).
Talsma et al. discloses that the polymers of the composition can include polysaccharides, starches, guar, xanthan and other gums, collagen, gelatins, and among others (see paragraph 0014) as well as other naturally occurring polymers and among others (see paragraph 0058) Talsma et al. discloses their compositions can be formed as wound dressings (see paragraph 0052). Talsma teaches that their compositions comprising the polymeric solution can be used as a coating by curing the polymer onto a substate (paragraph 0100), which is interpreted as forming a gel coating. Talsma et al. further exemplifies in Example 5 (see paragraphs 0190-0193) of preparing a gallium colloid-PVP hydrogel coating, in which the solvents used in the preparation were neutral pH solvents such as water and THF/ethanol.
The difference between Talsma et al. and the claimed invention is that Talsma et al. does not teach a three-dimensional bipolymeric matrix comprising a second polymeric network comprising second colloids non-covalently bonded with a sulfated polysaccharide.
Cornwell teaches a multi-component self-assembled hydrogel based on two dibenzyldene-d-sorbitol (DBS) derivatives, in which the two DBS gelators are functionalized with carboxylic acids: the first in the 4-position of the aromatic rings (DBS-CO2H), the second having glycine connected through an amide bond and displaying a terminal carboxylic acid (DBS-Gly) (see Abstract). Cornwell teaches that the self-assembly of supramolecular gels is a simple, effective way of creating nanostructured soft materials with wide-ranging applications (see left column page 15486). Cornwell teaches that there has been increasing interest in the assembly of multicomponent gels with the potential for each individual component to endow the gel with a different behavior (see left column page 15486). Cornwell teaches that it is desirable to achieve a greater degree of spatial control over gel-formation, as this would allow the creation of morphologies that may be able to participate more intelligently in high-tech applications – from conducting soft materials to tissue engineering (see left column to right column page 15486).
Cornwell teaches that slowly lowering the pH of a mixture of gelators using gluconolactone (GdL) initially triggers assembly of DBS-CO2H, followed by DBS-gly due to mixtures being able to self-assemble at different pKa values (see Abstract). Cornwell demonstrates the formation of a multi-component DBS-Gly and DBS-CO2H hydrogel from solution with the addition of GdL in Figure S2 (page S2 in attached Supplementary Information). Cornwell teaches that GdL as an acidification agent slowly acidifies the solution and is well-known to form homogenous gels (see last paragraph left column page 15487).
Nunamaker et al. discloses the stability and biocompatibility of implanted calcium alginate hydrogels (see Abstract). Nunamaker teaches that alginate is a commonly used biomedical hydrogel (see Abstract) and is used for a broad range of material properties (see right column page 1128). Nunamaker et al. discloses in Figure 1 (see page 1129) the process of forming calcium alginate hydrogels. Nunamaker et al. discloses in situ gelling of calcium alginate hydrogels in which the addition of a catalyst, such as gluconolactone (GDL), was used to slowly acidify the alginate-calcium carbonate solution, which drives the release of calcium ions and creates a more uniform and reproducible structure (see page 1129 left column). Nunamaker teaches that this method of gelling produced a more stable gel over diffusion gelling, and teaches this may be the preferred method in neural interface applications where stability is the primary concern (see Abstract).
Vachon et al. discloses antimicrobial compositions for promoting healing and preventing and treating infection in mammalian subjects. Vachon et al. discloses that their compositions are used for wound healing and as a topical treatment (see paragraph 0009).
Vachon et al. discloses their compositions comprise of an oligodynamic metal and a thiol compound, wherein the thiol compound decreases toxicity of the metal (see claim 1 of Vachon). Vachon et al. also discloses that the oligodynamic metals may be combined with a thiol compound to form an oligodynamic-thiol compound (see paragraph 0010). Vachon et al. discloses the thiol compound may be selected from glutathione, penicillamine, bacillithiol, mycothiol, cysteine, or 4-mercaptophenylboronic acid (see claim 6 in Vachon). Vachon et al. discloses that the attached thiol compounds provide distinct advantages including by mediating chemical reduction of endogenous thiol compounds, including antioxidants, in a wound. (see paragraph 0011) as well as unexpected advantages of decreased toxicity, increased stability, and increased absorption or bioavailability of the oligodynamic metal in a wound environment (see paragraph 0050). Vachon et al. discloses that the thiol compounds may acquire cations from non-acetate salts (see paragraph 0082), which is being interpreted as capable of positively charging the attached oligodynamic metal.
Vachon et al. discloses their compositions can combine antimicrobial oligodynamic metals with thiol and polysulfonated compounds such as polysulfated polysaccharides including dextrin sulfate, dextran sulfate, chitosan sulfate, or cellulose sulfate, among others (see paragraphs 0075 and 0091). Vachon et al. discloses that the solubility of polysulfonated materials described herein can be tailored to be render formulations that are effectively insoluble in deionized water, yet soluble in ionic aqueous media (e.g., physiological solutions, including wound exudates), and that this provides extraordinary advantages by allowing easier application and controlled storage and release/activation of the antimicrobial compositions into a wound environment upon contact (see paragraph 88). Vachon teaches their compositions can be in a form of a hydrogel and that their compounds can be dispersed into a solid matrix such as alginate and among others (see paragraph 0144). Vachon et al. discloses that in certain embodiments, their oligodynamic metal - polysulfonate compounds can be formed by reacting the acid form with a pKa<4.76 of the polysulfonate with an acetate salt containing the desired cation compound to create a polymeric salt reaction product (see paragraph 0095).
It would have been prima facie obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected and combined two of the colloid-polymer compositions of Talsma such as cerium calcium carbonate colloid – xanthan and platinum colloid – polysaccharide with further guidance from Cornwell because Talsma discloses their various colloid-polymer compositions are useful for the same purpose of wound healing application (see In re Kerkhoven, MPEP 2144.06 section I). Furthermore, Talsma provides guidance of forming metal-polymer hydrogel compositions, and Cornwell provides guidance of forming multi-component hydrogels with the potential for each individual component to endow the gel with a different behavior. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan would have a motivation to select and combine different colloid-polymer compositions disclosed in Talsma in order to form multi-component hydrogels with each component endowing different behaviors to the gel.
It would have been further prima facie obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have prepared the hydrogel of the combined colloid-polymer composition of Talsma described above by using a gluconolactone (GdL) acidifier as disclosed in Nunamaker and Cornwell as well as modifying the platinum by attaching a thiol compound as disclosed in Vachon. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made these modifications with a reasonable expectation of success because Nunamaker provides guidance of incorporating calcium into similar metal-polymer hydrogels more uniformly with the addition of gluconolactone in order to form more stable gels for medical applications in which long-term stability of the gel is a primary concern, and Cornwell also demonstrates the use of gluconolactone to form homogenous multi component-based hydrogels. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan could have chosen from a finite number of predictable solutions of forming hydrogels for wound healing applications with a reasonable expectation of success. Furthermore, Vachon provides guidance of attaching thiol compounds to metals in order to mediate chemical reduction of endogenous thiol compounds, including antioxidants, in a wound as well as provide unexpected advantages of decreased toxicity, increased stability, and increased absorption or bioavailability of the oligodynamic metal in a wound environment. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to modify the metal in the combined colloid-polymer composition of Talsma described above with a thiol compound in order to obtain the described advantages for wound healing application.
It would have been further prima facie obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the polysaccharide on the platinum colloid-polysaccharide network in the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above with a sulfated polysaccharide as disclosed in Vachon to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made this substitution with a reasonable expectation of success because Vachon et al. provides guidance of using a sulfated polysaccharide in antimicrobial compositions with an expressed advantage of allowing easier application and controlled storage and release/activation of the antimicrobial compositions into a wound environment upon contact. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to use a polysulfated polysaccharide in a hydrogel such as the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above to obtain the described advantages for wound healing applications.
In regards to claims 6-7, it would have also been prima facie obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above for the treatment of ulcers or slowly granulating wounds as disclosed in Talsma to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made this modification with a reasonable expectation of success because both Talsma and Vachon teach their respective compositions are useful for treating skin wounds, and Talsma provides further guidance that their compositions provide topical protection, deodorization (e.g. of wounds or ulcers), and treating ulcers, slowly granulating wounds, vaginitis, fistulas, dermatitis, or popodermatitis. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan could have chosen from a finite number of predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success.
In regards to claim 8, claim 8 is also prima facie obvious because even though claim 8 further limits the type of the recited radiodermatitis, claim 6 (claim 8 depends from claim 6) only requires a method for healing a skin sore or radiodermatitis. Neither claims 6 nor 8 limit the method to healing radiodermatitis, so the teachings of the alternative of healing a skin sore described above meets the limitations of claim 8.
In regards to claim 9, it would also be prima facie obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to form the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above by using a solution (B) comprising the GdL acidifier and sulfated polysaccharide and adding this solution to another solution (A) comprising the cerium calcium carbonate colloid – xanthan composition and the platinum-thiol compound complex to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made this modification with a reasonable expectation of success because Talsma provides guidance that the colloids can be formed first and then added to the polymer composition or can be formed in situ in the composition comprising the polymer (see paragraph 0075), and Nunamaker provides guidance of also separately adding the acidifier to a metal-polymer complex (see Figure 1 in Nunamaker). Therefore, all of the required claimed steps for forming the matrix using two separate solutions are disclosed because the formation of the first polymer-colloid (Col-1) is being interpreted as being formed in situ in solution (A), and the formation of the second polymer-colloid (Col-2) is being interpreted as being formed by separately adding the solution (B) containing the acidifier and sulfated polysaccharide to the second colloid in solution (A). Furthermore, MPEP 2144.04 IV.C recites “selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results”.
In regards to claim 12-14, the device for implementing the method according to claim 9 does not have a functional relationship with the claimed process of making recited in claim 9 and is offered no patentable weight because the device only serves as a container to package the two solutions and are otherwise unrelated to producing the claimed matrix. See MPEP 2111.05 section (I)(B). Therefore, claims 12-14 are also prima facie obvious.
In regards to claim 15, it would have also been prima facie obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the two solutions as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above by further preparing solution (A) at pH 7 and solution (B) at pH 3 to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made this modification with a reasonable expectation of success because Talsma provides guidance of using neutral solvents such as water and THF/ethanol to form a colloid-polymer matrix, and Vachon provides further guidance of preparing a metal-sulfated polymer complex using an acidic form of the polysulfonate compound. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan could have chosen from a finite number of predictable solutions of preparing a colloid-polymer at neutral pH as disclosed in Talsma such as the recited first colloids in the recited solution (A) as well as preparing a colloid-sulfated polymer using a polysulfated compound in acidic conditions as disclosed in Vachon such as the recited sulfated polysaccharide in the recited solution (B) with a reasonable expectation of success.
In regards to claim 17, it would have also been prima facie obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use alginate as disclosed in Vachon as the unsulfated polysaccharide in the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made this modification with a reasonable expectation of success because Talsma provides guidance of using other naturally occurring polymers in their compositions, and Vachon provides further guidance that alginate, which is a naturally occurring polymer, is suitable for use in a similar oligodynamic metal-thiol based hydrogels. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan could have chosen from a finite number of predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 3 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talsma et al. (US20100074932A1 in PTO-892 dated 02/24/2025) in view of Cornwell et al. (JACS, 2015 in PTO-892), Nunamaker et al. (Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2007 in PTO-892), and Vachon et al. (US20160030476A1 in PTO-892 dated 02/24/2025), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Motoyama et al. (Journal of the Pharmaceutical Society of Japan, 2018 in PTO-892).
The combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon are as described above and teach the matrix recited in claim 1 as discussed above.
The combined references, however, do not teach a recited sulfated polysaccharide in claim 3.
Motoyama et al. discloses the development of sacran hydrogels as wound dressing material (see Abstract). Motoyama et al. discloses that sacran, a novel megamolecular polysaccharide derived from the cyanobacterium Aphanothece sacrum, has a very high molecular weight that exceeds 10^7 g/mol and water-superabsorbent capacity (see Abstract). Motoyama et al. discloses that the sacran hydrogel has good properties as a wound dressing application because it not only provides a moisturizing effect but also the anti-inflammatory effect of sacran as well as a potential to deliver water soluble complex of curcumin/HP-γ-CyD at the wound site and thereby promote wound healing (see Abstract).
It would have been prima facie obvious to combine Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon with Motoyama before the effective filling date of the claimed invention by substituting the sulfated polysaccharide in the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above with the sacran polysaccharide disclosed in Motoyama to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made this substitution with a reasonable expectation of success because Motoyama provides guidance that sacran polysaccharide has potential uses as a wound dressing material with expressed advantages of moisturizing effects, anti-inflammatory effects, and delivering other water-soluble complexes to promote wound healing. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to use the sacran disclosed in Motoyama for the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above in order to obtain the described advantages.
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talsma et al. (US20100074932A1 in PTO-892 dated 02/24/2025) in view of Cornwell et al. (JACS, 2015 in PTO-892), Nunamaker et al. (Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2007 in PTO-892), and Vachon et al. (US20160030476A1 in PTO-892 dated 02/24/2025), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Fraser-Pitt et al. (Infect Immun, 2018 in PTO-892).
The combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon are as described above.
The combined references, however, do not disclose using cysteamine as the agent capable of positively charging the colloid.
Fraser-Pitt et al. discloses the use of cysteamine for increasing Pseudomonas aeruginosa sensitivity to reactive oxygen and nitrogen species and potentiating therapeutic antibiotics against bacterial infection (see Abstract). Fraser-Pitt et al. discloses that cysteamine acts as an antioxidant (see first paragraph in section “Introduction” and having broad-spectrum antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities (see Abstract). Fraser-Pitt et al. further discloses that cysteamine potentiates many different classes of antibiotics against a selection of priority antibiotic-resistant pathogens (see Abstract).
It would be prima facie obvious to combine Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon with Fraser-Pitt before the effective filling date of the claimed invention by using the cysteamine disclosed in Fraser-Pritt as the thiol compound in the platinum-thiol compound of the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made this selection with a reasonable expectation of success because Vachon provides guidance that their thiol compounds have uses as antioxidants in their compositions, and Fraser-Pitt provides guidance that cysteamine, which is a thiol compound, also has uses for antioxidants with an expressed advantage of potentiating many different classes of antibiotics against antibiotic-resistant pathogens. Therefore, an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to use the cysteamine of Fraser-Pitt for the modified hydrogel as disclosed by the combined teachings of Talsma, Cornwell, Nunamaker, and Vachon described above in order to obtain the described advantage for use in antimicrobial compositions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11, 16, and 20 are objected 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.
Conclusion
Claims 1-9, 12-15, and 17-19 are rejected.
This action is made non-final in view of the newly added rejections that were not necessitated by Applicant’s amendments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID H CHO whose telephone number is (571)270-0691. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM.
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, Scarlett Goon can be reached at 571-270-5241. 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.
/D.H.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1693 /SCARLETT Y GOON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1693