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 .
Final Rejection
Claims 1-2, 5-13 are pending. Claim 1 is independent. Claims 3-4 and 14 are cancelled.
Terminal disclaimers over 17/678,350 having US patent no. 12,180,317 B2 and 17/675,607 having US patent no. 12,281,188 B2 are of record.
Response to Amendment
The rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims.
The rejection of claims 1-2, 5-13 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Bridgeford et al. (US 3,689,466) is maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments file 12/17/2025 with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 5-13 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicants urge Bridgford et al. teach 1,3 propane sultone but do not teach the resin (A) derived from a betaine monomer comprising a group having an ethylenically unsaturated double bond, a cationic group, and an anionic group, and not comprising an ester bond or an amide bond. Furthermore Applicant’s urge that BRI of claim 1 requires the sultone to react with 1-vinylimidazole as in their specification [0074].
Upon careful consideration of Applicant’s arguments with the scope of claim 1, limitation wherein the betaine monomer is “derived from…” a particular moiety is a process limitation, not a structural or functional limitation, and as such the source of the betaine monomer has no effect on the structure formula (a1) constituent unit. Note Applicants specification [0041] states the betaine monomer providing the consitutient unit (a1) can be synthesized by a well-known reaction.
Arguments to the claims requiring a 1-vinylimidazole is not found commensurate with any claim language presented for examination. No claim requires the vinylimidazole in the composition.
Finally, Examiner maintains Bridgford et al. teach a reaction of cellulose xanthate-S-propane sulfonic acid with 1,3 propane sultone in a solvent reads upon Applicant’s specification [0041] copied herein
PNG
media_image1.png
596
710
media_image1.png
Greyscale
teaching the same. BRI of surface treatment liquid of claim 1 is to the resin (A) comprising a constituent unit (a1) which is synthesized by the reaction of a sultone with the solvent not comprising a coloring agent. The patentability of claim 1 does not depend on the process of the resin production. Bridgeford col.13, example 12, Bridgeford et al. illustrate a surface treatment liquid wherein the resin (A) with 1,4 butane sultone (see abstract, claim 1 and example 12) which meets the same betaine monomer exemplified in the specification US 2023/0312079 [0041]. And example 2, col.11, Bridgeford et al. illustrate a propane sulfonate (also noted Applicant’s specification 0041) is diluted with water yielding a 1% clear gel free solution, thus encompassing the resin and solvent wherein the composition does not comprise a coloring agent as required by the claims. Accordingly Bridgeford is pertinent to the claims and the rejection is maintained below.
Claim Rejections 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 5-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Bridgeford et al. (US 3,689,466)
Bridgeford et al. (US 3,689,466) teach mixtures containing up to about 200 parts of the polyvinyl alcohol resin per 100 parts by weight of the cellulose S-xanthogenate, wherein these mixtures can be applied as water solutions to a wide range of natural and synthetic fabrics and dried to provide coatings thereon which have surprising resistance to removal by water, detergent, and conventional organic solvents and display excellent soil resistance and soil releasability to both hydrophilic and organophilic soiling agents. See col. 10,ln.20-30. See also col.1,ln.10-30 and col.4,ln.60-70 teaching the reaction of cellulose xanthate-S-propane sulfonic acid with 1,3 propane sultone in a solvent
In col.13, example 12, Bridgeford et al. illustrate their surface treatment liquids comprising a resin (A) with 1,4 butane sultone (see abstract and example 12) which meets the same betaine monomer constituent unit (a1) in the specification US 2023/0312079 [0041] and thus would be expected to meet the constituent units of claims 1-2 and 5-13.
Example 2, col.11, Bridgeford et al. illustrate a propane sulfonate is diluted with water and exemplifies yielding a 1% clear gel free solution. This encompasses the claim 1 limitation to wherein the composition does not comprise a coloring agent as required by the claims and illustrates the (S) solvent of claims 1 and 10.
Limitation to more than 70 mol% as required by claim 7 is met in col.7,ln.8-18 teaching the addition and/or consumption of sultone reactant in amounts corresponding to at least 50% to at least 90% mole ratios of sultone to xanthogenate ester substituents.
Bridgeford et al. teach their product solution is diluted with about 600 ml. of water, then acidified with 10% hydrochloric acid, and then sodium chloride is added to salt-out the sulfonated product (see example 1, col.10,ln.65-70) which teaching meets the claims 8-9 wherein the composition further comprises an electrolyte (B) as claimed.
Bridgeford et al. teach a hydrophilization treatment method for making a surface of a treatment target hydrophilic, (see col.6,ln.60-65], the method comprising applying the surface treatment liquid according to claim 11 to form a coating on the surface of the treatment target. See col.8,ln.40-75 teaching coating of glass, example 32, col.18,ln.21 teaching wood and col.1,ln.60-65 teaching upholstery, which meets the claim 13 treatment target.
The hydrophilization method of claims 11-12 is met in example 16 col.14-15 illustrating their coating is essentially totally resistant to removal by simple washing and rinsing and yield soil resistance protection.
Bridgeford et al. do not exemplify the claimed surface treatment liquid comprising resin (A) and solvent (S) without any coloring agents within a single example. However, Bridgeford teach clear surface treatment liquid polymers containing carboxylic acid and sulphonic acids (col.2,ln.5) and in col.13, ln.55-60, example 12 Bridgeford et al. illustrate a resin (A) with 1,4 butane sultone which meets the same betaine monomer exemplified in the specification US 2023/0312079 [0041].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrive at the claimed surface treatment liquid comprising resin (A) and solvent (S) without any coloring agents as claimed because in the examples 1, 2 and 12 in col.10-13, Bridgeford et al. suggest a resin(A) comprising 1,4 butane sultone with water which clear coating is applied to a surface making the surface soil repellant in general.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PREETI KUMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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.
/GREGORY R DELCOTTO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/PREETI KUMAR/Examiner, Art Unit 1761