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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 02/13/2026 has been entered. Claims 35-54 are pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have introduced new matter and a detailed description of the issue is provided below in the 112(a) section.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant summarizes the process of preparing the inorganic/organic hybrid material taught by Jiang on Pg. 8-9. Applicant argues as a result of Jiang preparing a polyorganoalkoxysilane first prior to introducing an organic monomer material, the polymer of Jiang would contain regions with an inorganic backbone (i.e. regions composed of Si-O-Si bonds) and regions with an organic backbone (i.e. regions composed of polymerized vinyl groups). Applicant contrasts the method of Jiang with the instant invention on Pg. 9-10, where Applicant asserts the hydrophobic, hydrophilic and vinyl organosilane monomers are polymerized via radical polymerization in a single reaction vessel. Applicant argues that due to the differences in preparation, the claimed particles consist of an organic backbone without an inorganic component.
Examiner notes that Applicant’s summary of Jiang on Pg. 8-9 is reasonable however Jiang teaches in [0025] that the organic monomer can be undergo polymerization via free-radical mediated polymerization. Accordingly, the assertion that Jiang excludes radical polymerization of the organic components to form a polymer is not what the general disclosure of Jiang teaches a skilled artisan. Examiner notes the differences in the method of preparation between Jiang and the instant invention. However, While claim 35 and 51 do not contain product-by-process limitations, Applicant is reminded the determination of patentability for product claims 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). Further, “although produced by a different process, the burden shifts to applicant to come forward with evidence establishing an unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art product”, In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 798, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir.1983). See MPEP 2113.
PNG
media_image1.png
169
338
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 1. Reproduced image from [0036] in Jiang depicting the organic polymer component. The red box was added by Examiner for emphasis.)]Examiner notes Jiang clearly depicts a copolymer hybrid where the polymer attached the silica components are entirely organic (i.e. free of silicon) ([0036]).
Further, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., exclusion of inorganic backbones while containing regions of organic backbone) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Claim 35 requires the organic copolymer component consists of a polymerized alkenyl organic backbone that does not include silicon, however the claim is not interpreted to exclude other backbones within the material, as line 1-2 includes the phrase “inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particles comprising”, where the term “comprising” expands the scope of the claim to include other components. Examiner also notes that support for a material lacking an inorganic backbone does not appear to be present in the instant specification. If such data is present, Examiner encourages pointing to it specifically.
New claim 51, introduced in the amendment filed 02/13/2026, contains similar fact patterns to the above description, where the claim in line 5 requires a backbone that consists of a “hydrophilic monomer alkenyl group, a hydrophobic monomer alkenyl group, and the organosilane monomer alkenyl group.” The claim includes the term “comprising in line 1, where the term “comprising” expands the scope of the claim to include other components.
Applicant further argues on Pg. 11 the claimed particles exhibit utility not found in Jiang, where the claimed particles exhibit greater stability than the particles of Jiang.
However, in response to applicant's argument that the claimed particles display greater stability that the particles of Jiang, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Further, Examiner notes Jiang explicitly teaches the porous inorganic/organic hybrid particles of Jiang are described as having improved stability to alkaline (i.e. basic) mobile phases ([0104]).
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 35-54 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 claims 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 inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, Applicant has amended claim 35, line 5 and new independent claim 51, line 7, to recite the phrase “backbone does not include silicon therein.” The instant specification does not include the exact phrase (i.e. does not include silicon) and a general reading of the instant specification does not teach the exclusion of silicon from the alkenyl backbone. Numerous mentions of silanes are discussed regarding the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane monomer (see [00312]-[00315]) however these such passages do not instruct the skilled artisan to avoid including silicon atoms in a polymerized alkenyl backbone. Silence will not generally suffice to support a negative claim limitation however there may be circumstances in which it can be established that a skilled artisan would understand a negative limitation to necessarily be present in a disclosure. See MPEP 2173.05(i). However, given the explicit teachings of the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane monomer (i.e. a compound that contains Si atoms) (see [00312]-[00315]), a skilled artisan would not necessarily assume silicon was absent from the polymer backbone.
PNG
media_image3.png
64
732
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The Applicant pointed to [00299] and [00229] in the Remarks filed 02/13/2026 for support of the amended limitations. However, [00229] states:
PNG
media_image4.png
898
740
media_image4.png
Greyscale
while [00299] states:
Neither of these passages discuss the exclusion of silicon from the alkenyl organic backbone. Examiner further notes that discussion of the hydrophilic organic monomer and hydrophobic organic monomer in the instant specification (see [0302]-[00310]) contains the term “comprises” which broadens the scope of the claim such that the exclusion of components from the monomer, including silicon atoms, is not presumed. Examiner also notes the term “backbone” is mentioned a single time in [00300] of the instant specification and this passage does not discuss exclusion of silicon from the backbone. This passage does not discuss silicon. Examiner notes the term backbone is commonly used in the art and is not the sole issue with the phrase.
Accordingly, a skilled artisan viewing the instant disclosure would not be expected to come to the conclusion that the organic backbone does not include silicon from the instant invention and the limitation is considered to be new matter not present in the instant invention.
Claims 36-50 and 52-54 all depend from claims 35 and 51, respectively, and are thus also rejected.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 35-54 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.
Regarding claims 35-54, the phrase “the backbone is free of silicon” is unclear. The claim outlines that a “backbone” is formed from a hydrophilic monomer, a hydrophobic monomer, and an organosilane monomer. The phrase “free of silicon” is interpreted such that it is being intended to limited silicon atoms being present in the backbone. As discussed above in the 112(a) section, the instant specification does not appear to support this limitation and an explicit description is lacking. It is therefore unclear how a backbone that comprises an organosilane monomer (i.e. a compound that contains silicon atoms) could simultaneously be free of silicon. In the interest of compact prosecution, the limitation is interpreted to be excluding silicon from the organic copolymer component of the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particles produced by the hydrophobic and hydrophilic monomers. The grafting of the hydrophobic and hydrophilic copolymer onto a core that contains silicon is considered to meet the claimed limitation. This interpretation is supported in part in at least [00328] of the instant specification.
Regarding claim 52, line 1-2, the term “C4-C60-alkyl functionalized organosilane compound” has insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 52 depends from claim 51, where the term “C4-60 alkyl component” is introduced. However, the further description of an “alkyl functionalized organosilane” is not included in the description in claim 51. Claim 51 further describes a separate term “organosilane monomer having a hydrophobic monomer alkenyl group” which adds to the interpretation of a lack of antecedent basis as it appears to be an additional component from the claim. In the interest of compact prosecution, the term “C4-C60-alkyl functionalized organosilane compound” was interpreted as C4-C60 alkyl organosilane, such as those described in [00311] and [00315] of the instant specification.
Claims 36-50 and 52-54 all depend from claims 35 and 51, respectively, and are thus also rejected.
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 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 35-42, 44, and 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US20140194283A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022 as US9211524) in view of Brousmiche et al. (US20140096596A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022).
PNG
media_image5.png
244
870
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 35, Jiang teaches a porous inorganic/organic hybrid material comprising copolymeric hybrid materials, represented by the general formula (A)x(B)y(C)z, where A is an organic polymer, B is an organosiloxane repeating unit that can be further bonded to repeat units B or C via inorganic siloxane bonds, or further bonded to one or more repeat units A or B via organic bonds (Abstract; [0007]-[0035]). Jiang teaches the hybrid material particles may be made by hydrolytically condensing an alkenyl-functionalized organosilane, with an organic olefin monomer, followed by further hydrolytic condensation with an alkenyl-functionalized organosilane ([0059]-[0061]). Jiang teaches a variety of organic monomer reagents can be polymerized to provide the organic polymer component (A) of the hybrid material ([0095]-[0096]), where the organic monomers include divinyl benzene, styrene, and 1-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone (shown below) ([0065]).
The organic monomers divinyl benzene and styrene taught by Jiang are consistent with hydrophobic organic monomers, as outlined in the instant invention in at least Claim 41 and [00303]. The inorganic monomer 1-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone taught by Jiang are consistent with hydrophilic organic monomers, as outlined in the instant invention in at least Claim 40 and [00302]. Jiang teaches the organic polymer (A) can have repeating units produced by the combination of random and block units, produced from both hydrophobic and hydrophilic monomers ([0096]; Claim 141). While Jiang does not explicitly teach an example comprising divinyl benzene, 1-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone, and surface functionalization with octadecyltrimethoxysilane, Jiang discloses preparing a porous inorganic/organic copolymeric hybrid material, as outlined above. A skilled artisan would be motivated to combine the organic copolymer and modified alkenyl-functionalized organosilane monomer to advantageously provide materials with reduced swelling upon solvation with organic solvents ([0087]).
Jiang teaches the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane is further surface functionalized with compounds having the formula Z8(R’)bSi-R where Z can include Cl, Br, I, C1 -Cs alkoxy, and dialkylamino, R’ can be a C1-C6 straight, cyclic or branched alkyl group, and R may include alkyl, aryl, cyano, amino, dial, nitro, cation or anion exchange groups, or embedded polar functionalities, where preferred embodiments include octadecyltrimethoxysilane ([0046]-[0049]). Jiang teaches a and b are each an integer from 0 to 3, provided that a+b = 3 ([0047]). The surface modifying compound octadecyltrimethoxysilane taught by Jiang is consistent with the term “a C4-C60 alkyl component” as required by the claim, being disclosed in the instant invention in at least claim 37-38 and [00315].
It is noted the formula in paragraph [0047] of Jiang has a typo, where “Z8(R’)bSi-R” is intended to be “Za(R’)bSi-R”, where the correct formula is used in the general formula in paragraph [0048], reproduced below. Accordingly, the general formula Z8(R’)bSi-R is interpreted to be Za(R’)bSi-R.
Jiang further teaches the homogenous copolymeric hybrid material prepared by radical-mediated polymerization of the organic repeat units produces a polymeric structure without silicon incorporated into the organic polymeric component ([0025]; [0036]).
PNG
media_image1.png
169
338
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 2. Reproduced image from [0036] in Jiang depicting the organic polymer component. The red box was added by Examiner for emphasis.)]
Jiang does not describe this component as a “backbone” however the material taught by Jiang is comprised of the same monomers, as discussed above, and accordingly is interpreted as a “backbone” meeting the claimed limitation of a polymerized alkenyl organic component. As depicted in the reproduced image above, the polymeric component depicted does not contain silicon atoms in the polymer chain and is only attached to siloxanes (i.e. an Si atom) at the end of the chain (depicted on the right of the image above. Examiner notes that the organic polymer must be connected to silicon at some point, which is consistent with the instant invention and discussed in at least [00323] and [00326]-[00330].
The claims require the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent comprises at least one hydrophilic organic monomer and at least one hydrophobic organic monomer. While Jiang teaches a porous inorganic/organic homogenous copolymeric hybrid material where the copolymer can comprise hydrophobic or hydrophilic components, Jiang does not explicitly motivate the incorporation of both a hydrophobic and hydrophilic component into the copolymer fragment.
Brousmiche teaches a porous material comprising a copolymer of at least one hydrophobic monomer and at least one hydrophilic monomer ([0006]-[0008]). Brousmiche teaches the copolymer comprising both hydrophobic and hydrophilic monomers displays superior wetting characteristics, selective capture of analytes of interest, and non-retention of interfering analytes ([0006]). Brousmiche describes the hydrophobic component as enabling the porous material to have affinity towards nonpolar solutes through hydrophobic interaction, while the hydrophilic component enables the porous material to have polar interactions and hydrogen bonding capabilities with solutes ([0109]).
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate both a hydrophilic component and a hydrophobic component into the copolymer in the sorbent of Jiang in order to provide a sorbent that has both affinity towards nonpolar solutes through hydrophobic interactions (i.e. from the hydrophobic component) as well as have the ability for polar interactions with hydrogen bonding capability with solutes (i.e. from the hydrophilic component) for the advantageous effect of providing a sorbent with superior wetting characteristics, selective capture of analytes of interest, and non-retention of interfering analytes, as taught by Brousmiche.
Regarding claim 36, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and Jiang further teaches the modification with the surface functionalization organosilane compound is conducted via hydrolytic condensation ([0037]; [0102]).
Regarding claims 37-38, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claims 35 and 36 and Jiang further teaches the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane is further surface functionalized with compounds having the formula Za(R’)bSi-R where Z can include Cl, Br, I, C1 -C5 alkoxy, and dialkylamino, R’ can be a C1 -C6 straight, cyclic or branched alkyl group, and R may include alkyl, aryl, cyano, amino, dial, nitro, cation or anion exchange groups, or embedded polar functionalities, where preferred embodiments include octadecyltrimethoxysilane ([0046]-[0049]). functionalizing group R may include alkyl,
aryl, cyano, amino, dial, nitro, cation or anion exchange groups, or embedded polar functionalities. Examples of suitable R functionalizing groups include C1-C30 alkyl, including
C1-C10, such as octyl (C8), octadecyl (C18), and triacontyl (C30); alkaryl, e.g., C1 -C4 -phenyl; cyanoalkyl groups, e.g., cyanopropyl; dial groups, e.g., propyldiol; amino groups,
e.g., aminopropyl; and alkyl or aryl groups with embedded polar functionalities ([0048]). Jiang teaches a and b are each an integer from 0 to 3, provided that a+b = 3 ([0047]). Jiang teaches preferred embodiments include octyltriethylchlorosilane, octadecyltrichlorosilane, octyldimethylchlorosilane, oetadecyldimethylchlorosilane, octadecyltrimethoxysilane and octadecyltrichlorosilane ([0049]).
Accordingly, the embodiment octadecyltrimethoxysilane satisfies the formula RSiZ1Z2Z3 required by claim 37, as it comprises a C8 alkyl group (octadecyl), and Z1-Z3 comprise a C1 alkoxy group (methoxy).
Regarding claim 39, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and Jiang further teaches examples where 3-(trimethoxysilyl)propylmethacrylate (MAPTMOS) is used as the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane monomer ([0120], [0123]).
Regarding claim 40, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and Jiang further teaches a variety of organic monomer reagents can be polymerized to provide the organic polymer component (A) of the hybrid material ([0095]-[0096]), where the organic monomer can be 1-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone (shown below), which has a 5-carbon ring (i.e. n = 1) ([0065]).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05 (I). In the instant case, the value taught by Jiang (n= 1) overlaps with the claimed range (n= 1-3). Therefore, the range in Jiang renders obvious the claimed range.
Regarding claim 41, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and Jiang further teaches a variety of organic monomer reagents can be polymerized to provide the organic polymer component (A) of the hybrid material ([0095]-[0096]), where the organic monomers include divinyl benzene and styrene ([0065]). Jiang teaches an example that can include both divinylbenzene and styrene ([0109]-[0110]), as well as examples using divinylbenzene ([0108]; [0111]-[0112]).
PNG
media_image6.png
264
254
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 42, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and Jiang further teaches the repeating unit (A) may be derived from organic monomers, where an example represented by the formula shown below:
where Q can be represented by a N(C1-6alkyl)3 , N(C1-6alkyl)2(C16alkylene-SO3 ), or C(C1-6hydroxyalkyl)3 ([0096]). In the case where Q is N(C1-6alkyl)2(C16alkylene-SO3), the “SO3” moiety is a sulfonate group.
Regarding claim 44, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and Jiang further teaches the organic monomer can be (3-acrylamidopropyl)trimethylammonium chloride (APTA), or [3-(methacryloylamino )propyl]dimethyl(3-sulfopropyl)ammonium hydroxide inner salt (MAPDAHI) ([0065]), all of which include quaternary ammonium groups.
Regarding claim 47, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and Jiang further teaches the organic monomer can be itaconic acid ([0065]), which includes a carboxyl group.
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US20140194283A1) in view of Brousmiche et al. (US20140096596A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022) and further in view of Lee et al. (US7442299; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022).
Regarding claim 43, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and the claims further require the copolymer comprises sulfonated divinylbenzene, to which Jiang and Brousmiche are silent.
PNG
media_image7.png
356
280
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Lee teaches a porous sorbent comprising a hydrophobic component and a hydrophilic polar component (col. 1, lines 39-53), that can include substituted divinylbenzene derivatives shown below:where X is selected from groups including sulfonate (SO3H) (col. 3, lines 1-31).
Advantageously, incorporating sulfonate groups and other polar functionalities into the sorbent material allows for selective capture of analytes and superior wetting characteristics (col. 1, lines 39-56).
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide substituted divinylbenzene monomers comprising sulfonate groups in the inorganic/organic hybrid material of Jiang in order to provide a material able to capture selective analytes while featuring superior wetting characteristics, as taught by Lee.
Claims 45-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US20140194283A1) in view of in view of Brousmiche et al. (US20140096596A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022) and further in view of D'Alelio (US2697079).
Regarding claims 45-46, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teaches the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and the claims further limitations to which Jiang and Brousmiche are silent.
PNG
media_image8.png
84
516
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
306
522
media_image9.png
Greyscale
D’Alelio teaches a resin material that is comprises a cross-linking agent including divinyl benzenes and a quaternary ammonium group that includes a cross-linkable group (Abstract; col. 2, lines 36-64; Claim 5). D’Alelio teaches the quaternary ammonium compounds include compounds with the following structure:D’Alelio further teaches allyl-trimethylammonium hydroxide as an example (col. 2, line 21; col. 5, line 35-85), which has a C3 alkenyl group (i.e. allyl) and three C1 alkyl groups (i.e. methyl). Advantageously, polymers comprising quaternary ammonium groups provide improved anion exchange capabilities (col. 1, line 34-68).
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide quaternary ammonium groups, such as via allyl-trimethylammonium hydroxide, in the inorganic/organic hybrid material of Jiang in order to provide a material with improved anion exchange capabilities, as taught by D’Alelio.Claims 48-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US20140194283A1) in view of Brousmiche et al. (US20140096596A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022) and further in view of Balayan et al. (US20080154029A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022).
Regarding claims 48-49, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teaches the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and the claims further limitations to which Jiang and Brousmiche are silent.
Balayan teaches a sorbent material comprising inorganic and organic components, where an organic polymer is introduced as a cross-linkable unsubstituted or substituted (1,4 or 1,2)-divinylbenzene B of general formula:
PNG
media_image10.png
218
658
media_image10.png
Greyscale
where R may be at least one hydroxyl-, carboxy-, nitro-, chloro-, bromo-, fluoro-, alkoxy-, acetoxy-, amino-, mono- or dialkylamino-, acetamino-, and alkyl (C-C)-group ([0028]). When the divinylbenzene is carboxy substituted, the limitation required by claim 48 is met while when the divinylbenzene is substituted by NH2 or N(Alk)2, the limitations required by claim 49 are met.
Advantageously, preparation of an inorganic/organic sorbent material comprising substituted divinylbenzene provides a sorbent with high mechanical stability and very good hydrodynamic characteristics ([0034]).
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide substituted divinylbenzene monomers including carboxy, amino, and alkylamino groups in the inorganic/organic hybrid material of Jiang in order to provide a material with high mechanical stability and very good hydrodynamic characteristics, as taught by Balayan.
Claim 50 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US20140194283A1) in view of Brousmiche et al. (US20140096596A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022) and further in view of Mallet et al. (US7731844).
Regarding claim 50, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teaches the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 35 and the claims further limitations to which Jiang and Brousmiche are silent.
Mallet teaches a porous material comprising at least one hydrophobic component and at least one hydrophilic component, where the copolymer prepared comprises a piperazinyl moiety (Claim 1, 6; col. 21, Example 3; col. 7, line 59-col. 8, line 3). Advantageously, the porous materials prepared according to Mallet display superior wetting characteristics, selective capture of analytes of interest, and provides materials that overcome the problems of particles passing through frits (col. 2, lines 11-18).
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate piperazine moieties in the organic copolymer component in the inorganic/organic hybrid material of Jiang in order to provide a material with improved wetting and selective capture of analytes that can overcome the problems of particles passing through frits, as taught by Mallet.
Claims 51-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US20140194283A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022 as US9211524) in view of Brousmiche et al. (US20140096596A1; cited in IDS dated 08/10/2022).
Regarding claim 51, Jiang teaches a porous inorganic/organic hybrid material comprising copolymeric hybrid materials, represented by the general formula (A)x(B)y(C)z, where A is an organic polymer, B is an organosiloxane repeating unit that can be further bonded to repeat units B or C via inorganic siloxane bonds, or further bonded to one or more repeat units A or B via organic bonds (Abstract; [0007]-[0035]). Jiang teaches the hybrid material particles may be made by hydrolytically condensing an alkenyl-functionalized organosilane, with an organic olefin monomer, followed by further hydrolytic condensation with an alkenyl-functionalized organosilane ([0059]-[0061]). Jiang teaches a variety of organic monomer reagents can be polymerized to provide the organic polymer component (A) of the hybrid material ([0095]-[0096]), where the organic monomers include divinyl benzene, styrene, and 1-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone (shown below) ([0065]).
PNG
media_image5.png
244
870
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The organic monomers divinyl benzene and styrene taught by Jiang are consistent with hydrophobic organic monomers, as outlined in the instant invention in at least Claim 41 and [00303]. The inorganic monomer 1-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone taught by Jiang are consistent with hydrophilic organic monomers, as outlined in the instant invention in at least Claim 40 and [00302]. Jiang teaches the organic polymer (A) can have repeating units produced by the combination of random and block units, produced from both hydrophobic and hydrophilic monomers ([0096]; Claim 141). While Jiang does not explicitly teach an example comprising divinyl benzene, 1-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone, and surface functionalization with octadecyltrimethoxysilane, Jiang discloses preparing a porous inorganic/organic copolymeric hybrid material, as outlined above. A skilled artisan would be motivated to combine the organic copolymer and modified alkenyl-functionalized organosilane monomer to advantageously provide materials with reduced swelling upon solvation with organic solvents ([0087]).
Jiang teaches the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane is further surface functionalized with compounds having the formula Z8(R’)bSi-R where Z can include Cl, Br, I, C1 -Cs alkoxy, and dialkylamino, R’ can be a C1-C6 straight, cyclic or branched alkyl group, and R may include alkyl, aryl, cyano, amino, dial, nitro, cation or anion exchange groups, or embedded polar functionalities, where preferred embodiments include octadecyltrimethoxysilane ([0046]-[0049]). Jiang teaches a and b are each an integer from 0 to 3, provided that a+b = 3 ([0047]).
Jiang further teaches examples where 3-(trimethoxysilyl)propylmethacrylate (MAPTMOS) is used as the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane monomer ([0120], [0123]). The surface modifying compound MAPTMOS taught by Jiang is consistent with the term “a C4-C60 alkyl component” as required by the claim, being disclosed in the instant invention in at least [0073], [0078], and [00311] of the instant specification.
It is noted the formula in paragraph [0047] of Jiang has a typo, where “Z8(R’)bSi-R” is intended to be “Za(R’)bSi-R”, where the correct formula is used in the general formula in paragraph [0048], reproduced below. Accordingly, the general formula Z8(R’)bSi-R is interpreted to be Za(R’)bSi-R.
Jiang further teaches the homogenous copolymeric hybrid material prepared by radical-mediated polymerization of the organic repeat units produces a polymeric structure without silicon incorporated into the organic polymeric component ([0025]; [0036]).
PNG
media_image1.png
169
338
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 3. Reproduced image from [0036] in Jiang depicting the organic polymer component. The red box was added by Examiner for emphasis.)]
Jiang does not describe this component as a “backbone” however the material taught by Jiang is comprised of the same monomers, as discussed above, and accordingly is interpreted as a “backbone” meeting the claimed limitation of a polymerized alkenyl organic component. As depicted in the reproduced image above, the polymeric component depicted does not contain silicon atoms in the polymer chain and is only attached to siloxanes (i.e. an Si atom) at the end of the chain (depicted on the right of the image above. Examiner notes that the organic polymer must be connected to silicon at some point, which is consistent with the instant invention and discussed in at least [00323] and [00326]-[00330].
The claims require the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent comprises at least one hydrophilic organic monomer and at least one hydrophobic organic monomer. While Jiang teaches a porous inorganic/organic homogenous copolymeric hybrid material where the copolymer can comprise hydrophobic or hydrophilic components, Jiang does not explicitly motivate the incorporation of both a hydrophobic and hydrophilic component into the copolymer fragment.
Brousmiche teaches a porous material comprising a copolymer of at least one hydrophobic monomer and at least one hydrophilic monomer ([0006]-[0008]). Brousmiche teaches the copolymer comprising both hydrophobic and hydrophilic monomers displays superior wetting characteristics, selective capture of analytes of interest, and non-retention of interfering analytes ([0006]). Brousmiche describes the hydrophobic component as enabling the porous material to have affinity towards nonpolar solutes through hydrophobic interaction, while the hydrophilic component enables the porous material to have polar interactions and hydrogen bonding capabilities with solutes ([0109]).
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate both a hydrophilic component and a hydrophobic component into the copolymer in the sorbent of Jiang in order to provide a sorbent that has both affinity towards nonpolar solutes through hydrophobic interactions (i.e. from the hydrophobic component) as well as have the ability for polar interactions with hydrogen bonding capability with solutes (i.e. from the hydrophilic component) for the advantageous effect of providing a sorbent with superior wetting characteristics, selective capture of analytes of interest, and non-retention of interfering analytes, as taught by Brousmiche.
Regarding claim 52, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 51 and Jiang further teaches the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane is further surface functionalized with compounds having the formula Za(R’)bSi-R where Z can include Cl, Br, I, C1 -C5 alkoxy, and dialkylamino, R’ can be a C1 -C6 straight, cyclic or branched alkyl group, and R may include alkyl, aryl, cyano, amino, dial, nitro, cation or anion exchange groups, or embedded polar functionalities, where preferred embodiments include octadecyltrimethoxysilane ([0046]-[0049]). functionalizing group R may include alkyl,
aryl, cyano, amino, dial, nitro, cation or anion exchange groups, or embedded polar functionalities. Examples of suitable R functionalizing groups include C1-C30 alkyl, including
C1-C10, such as octyl (C8), octadecyl (C18), and triacontyl (C30); alkaryl, e.g., C1 -C4 -phenyl; cyanoalkyl groups, e.g., cyanopropyl; dial groups, e.g., propyldiol; amino groups,
e.g., aminopropyl; and alkyl or aryl groups with embedded polar functionalities ([0048]). Jiang teaches a and b are each an integer from 0 to 3, provided that a+b = 3 ([0047]). Jiang teaches preferred embodiments include octyltriethylchlorosilane, octadecyltrichlorosilane, octyldimethylchlorosilane, oetadecyldimethylchlorosilane, octadecyltrimethoxysilane and octadecyltrichlorosilane ([0049]).
Accordingly, the embodiment octadecyltrimethoxysilane satisfies the formula RSiZ1Z2Z3 required by claim 37, as it comprises a C8 alkyl group (octadecyl), and Z1-Z3 comprise a C1 alkoxy group (methoxy).
Regarding claim 53, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 51 and Jiang further teaches examples where 3-(trimethoxysilyl)propylmethacrylate (MAPTMOS) is used as the alkenyl-functionalized organosilane monomer ([0120], [0123]).
Regarding claim 54, Jiang in view of Brousmiche teach the inorganic/organic hybrid sorbent particle of claim 51 and Jiang further teaches a variety of organic monomer reagents can be polymerized to provide the organic polymer component (A) of the hybrid material ([0095]-[0096]), where the organic monomer can be 1-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone has a 5-carbon ring (i.e. n = 1) ([0065]).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05 (I). In the instant case, the value taught by Jiang (n= 1) overlaps with the claimed range (n= 1-3). Therefore, the range in Jiang renders obvious the claimed range.
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 Jordan Wayne Taylor whose telephone number is (571)272-9895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30 AM - 5 PM EST; Second Fridays Off.
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, Sally A. Merkling can be reached on (571)272-6297. 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.
/J.W.T./Examiner, Art Unit 1738
/SALLY A MERKLING/SPE, Art Unit 1738
Prosecution Insights