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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 30-32 and 40-55 are pending in the Claim Set filed 1/22/2026.
Claims 30 and 44 has been amended.
Claims 48-55 are newly added.
Applicants elected species: polydiallyldialkyl ammonium salt, in the reply filed 1/8/2024.
Claims 1-29 and 33-39 are canceled in the Claim Set filed 1/22/22026.
Herein, claims 30-32 and 40-55 are for examination to the extent that they read on the elected species.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/18/2025 has been considered by the examiner and an initialed copy of the IDS is included with the mailing of this office action.
Withdrawn Rejections
The rejection of claims 30, 31 and 43-45 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney], Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Cheng et al (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces July p.6815, 2013) [Cheng], McKee eta (US20080003132) [Mckee], and Mukai et al (WO 20151111172): herein reference to English Translation US 2016/0271598) [Mukai] is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
The rejection of claims 32 and 46 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney], Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Cheng et al (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces July p.6815, 2013) [Cheng], McKee eta (US20080003132) [Mckee], and Mukai et al (WO 20151111172): herein reference to English Translation US 2016/0271598) [Mukai] as applied to claim 30, 31 and 43-45 above and further in view of Rabinowitz et al (USP 4064333) [Rabinowitz] is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
The rejection of claim 42 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney] and Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Cheng, McKee eta (US20080003132) [Mckeew] and Mukai et al (WO 20151111172) [Mckee]: herein reference to English Translation US 2016/0271598) as applied to claim 30, 31 and 43-45 above and further in view of Karjalainen et al (Influence of Hydrophobic Anion on Solution Properties of PDMAEMA, Macromolecules p.2103, 2014, March) [Karjalainen] is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
The rejection of claims 40 and 47 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney], Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Cheng et al (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces July p.6815, 2013) [Cheng], McKee eta (US20080003132) [Mckee], and Mukai et al (WO 20151111172): herein reference to English Translation US 2016/0271598) [Mukai].) as applied to claim 30, 31 and 43-45 above and further in view Xia et al (Preparation and characterization of chemically-crosslinked polyethyleneimine films on hydroxylated surfaces for stable bactericidal coatings, Thin Solid Films p.1120, 2011, September) [Xia] and Bartley et al (US20060231487) [Bartley] is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
The rejection of claim 41 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney] and Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Cheng, McKee eta (US20080003132) [Mckeew] and Mukai et al (WO 20151111172) [Mckee]: herein reference to English Translation US 2016/0271598) and Rabinowitz et al (USP 4064333) [Rabinowitz] as applied to claim 30, 31, 32 and 43-45 above and further in view of Thomas et al (US 20090206038) [Thomas] is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
The rejection of claims 30, 31, 32, 41 and 43-45 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,357,718 (herein ‘718) in view of Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Rabinowitz et al (USP 40643333) [Rabinowitz], Cheng et al (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces July p.6815, 2013) [Cheng], McKee eta (US20080003132) [Mckee], and Mukai et al (WO 20151111172): herein reference to English Translation US 2016/0271598) [Mukai] is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
The rejection of claims 30-32, 35, 36 and 40-43 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 and 16-28 of U.S. Patent No. 11426343 (herein ‘343) in view of Yang et al (The effect of additional poly-diallyl dimethyl ammonium-chloride on the speciation distribution of residual aluminum (Al) in a low DOC and high alkalinity reservoir water treatment, Chemical Engineering Journal p.55 May 2012) [Yang] is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
New Grounds of Rejection necessitated by claim amendments
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 30, 31, 43-45 and 48-55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953, of record) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350, , of record) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney], Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011, of record) [Tiliket] and Shayko et al (CA 2916078).
Claim Interpretation
The transitional term ‘comprising’, which is synonymous with ‘including’ is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps. See, e.g., Mars Inc. v. H.J. Heinz Co., 377 F.3d 1369, 1376, 71 USPQ2d 1837, 1843 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Also, See MPEP 2111.03. Moleculon Research Corp. v. CBS, Inc., 793 F.2d 1261, 229 USPQ 805 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Baxter, 656 F.2d 679, 686, 210 USPQ 795, 803 (CCPA 1981); Ex parte Davis, 80 USPQ 448, 450 (Bd. App. 1948) (‘comprising’ leaves “the claim open for the inclusion of unspecified ingredients even in major amounts). In Gillette Co. v. Energizer Holdings Inc., 405 F.3d 1367, 1371-73, 74 USPQ2d 1586, 1589-91 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
Regarding claims 30, 31 and 48-55,
Purschwitz teaches antimicrobial compositions comprising a biocide component and diallyldimethylammonium chloride, i.e., a polydiallyldialkylammonium salt, of which provides antimicrobial properties to the composition. Further, Purschwitz teaches that composition further comprises polyethylenimine that may provide an antimicrobial effect (Abstract; [0004-0012]; [0034]; [0048]; Claims 1-12 and 14; See entire document).
Purschwitz fails to teach that diallyldimethylammonium chloride is a biocide.
Lan cures the deficiency.
Lan teaches a disinfectant formulation comprising a biocide wherein the biocide is a quaternary ammonium compound (QAC) (p.13). In Particular, Lan teaches that the biocide is polydiallyldimethylammonium chloride (polyDADMAC) (p.14, lns.19-20; claim 16, 23). Thus, the teachings of Lan make prima facie obvious that polydiallyldimethylammonium chloride (elected species) is a microbial agent.
Purschwitz and Lan differ from the claims in that they do not teach that polyDADMAC and PEI are coupled with an air filter media. Claims 45-46.
However, Gesser and Gibney and Tiliket, as a whole, cures the deficiencies.
Gesser teaches indoor pollutant can be removed by passing the air in the home through a fiber glass filter with a thin layer coating of a polymeric material such as polyethylenimine (Abstract, col.1; See entire document).
Gibney teaches that unmodified polyethylenimine has antimicrobial properties (Title; Abstract; Section 3.5, See entire document). Further, Gibney teaches PEI derivatives containing quaternized ammonium salt groups (i.e., cationic polyethylenimines) provide antibacterial activity and further show potential as non-viral vector systems for drug transport across cell membranes (Fig,1, right col).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide an antimicrobial composition comprising polydiallyldimethylammonium chloride (polyDADMAC) and polyethylenimine (PEI), since both polyDADMAC and PEI have antimicrobial properties in accordance with the teachings of Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser and Gibney, as a whole. The claims are subject to an In re Kerkhoven analysis (In re Kerkhoven, 626, F.2s 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980)). The court held that it is obvious to combine two compositions, in order to form a third composition, when each of the two compositions is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose. The idea of combining them flows logically from there having been individually taught in the prior art (MPEP 2144.06). Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided an antimicrobial composition comprising polyDADMAC and PEI in view of the teachings of Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser and Gibney, as a whole.
Tiliket teaches that chemical modification of the surface of low-cost non-woven cellulosic fiber filters by fixing polyethylenimine (PEI) in order to give them an antiviral property. Particularly, Tiliket teaches that the best virus capture factor was obtained with 2 layers of Kimwipes functionalized with a PEI solution that were placed inside a commercial medical mask (i.e., air filter media). Tiliket teaches that the modified masks allowed the removal of 99.999% of a sprayed solution of bacteriophages. Tiliket teaches that PEI is electrostatically attached to the fiber (3.2, Improvement of PEI immobilization, right col.). Moreover, Tiliket teaches that results suggests that applications for systems involving PEI-supported fibers, such as air purifiers (See 4. Conclusions, p.350).
Thus, it was known it the prior at before that an antimicrobial material can be coupled to air filter media, e.g., cellulosic fiber filters, and of which would further suggest using other non-woven fiber filters, for example fiberglass further comprising to impart antimicrobial properties to the filter media in view of the teachings of Tiliket. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide polyDADMAC and PEI that are coupled to an air filter media in order to provide an air filter media comprising antimicrobial properties having a reasonable expectation of success in accordance with Tiliket.
Thirdly, Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney and Tiliket differ from the claims in that the documents do not teach that the antimicrobial composition further including particles that are photocatalytically active in visible light containing graphene. Graphene is recited in claims 30 and 48-55.
However, Shayko cures the deficiency.
Shayko teaches photocatalytic composite materials for decomposition of air pollutants (Title; Abstract; [0001]; [0002]; [0011; [0014]; [0033]; [0039]; [0045]; [0054]; [0060]). Shayko teaches composite materials having the ability to decompose airborne pollutants, such as NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), upon exposure to visible light or sunlight [0015]. Shayko teaches the photocatalytic composite materials are efficient catalysts for the decomposition of airborne pollutants, and maintain a high level of activity after hours of catalytic decomposition [0070]. Shayko teaches visible-light composite material comprising titanium dioxide, graphene oxide and graphene for the decomposition of NOx and/or volatile organic compounds, wherein the surface is a pollution control apparatus (VOCs) ([0054]; [0060]; Claims 1. 10, 12, 18, 21 and 25). Shayko teaches that the term "graphene" as used herein refers to a polycyclic aromatic molecule comprising a plurality of carbon atoms connected to each other by a covalent bond. The plurality of carbon atoms may form six-membered rings as a standard 20 repeating unit, or may further include 5-membered rings and/or 7-membered rings [0036]. Shayko teaches visible-light photocatalytic composite material for the decomposition of airborne pollutants that are formulated into compositions for application to surfaces, for example, where there is a need or desire to reduce airborne pollutants [0062-0064; [0066]. For example, the photocatalytic composite material may be applied to an air filter in an automobile, house or building for the reduction of airborne pollutants entering the automobile or structure, wherein the air filter surface is exposed to an artificial light source and the photocatalytic composite material catalyzes the decomposition of airborne pollutants flowing through the air filter ([0067]; See entire document).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the antimicrobial composition comprising an air filter media as taught by Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney and Tiliket, as a whole, to further include particles of photocatalytically active in visible light, in particular, graphene, of which is taught by Shako, to be effective at removing varied air pollutants, e.g., NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Thereby, enhancing the overall efficacy of the modified antimicrobial composition comprising an air filter media to optimize the removal of diverse air pollutants having a reasonable expectation of success.
All the claimed elements herein are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide instantly claimed antimicrobial composition and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill as evidenced by Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket and Shayko, as a whole, having a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 43,
Lan teaches a disinfectant formulation comprising a biocide is a quaternary ammonium compound (QAC) (p.13), wherein the biocide is polydiallyldimethylammonium chloride (polyDADMAC) (p.14, lns.19-20; claim 16, 23). The disinfectant formulation is used to treat a surface to impart a film having a capacity to quickly kill bacteria and other germs for at least 24 hours after deposit of the film on a treated surface (Abstract; p.7, lns.21-25). Moreover, Lan teaches that the disinfectant formulation comprises a polymer binder that is carboxylated polyethyleneimine (PEIC) (i.e., oxazoline homopolymer) (See p.4-10, p.10, e.g., molecular structure B = ethylenenine, R3 = Hydrogen; claim 4). Lan teaches that the nitrogen in the ethyleneimine repeating unit can be further quarternized to generate a cationic copolymer (p.11, R3 = R4 = Hydrogen, See molecular structure, first full paragraph). Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that polydiallyldimethylammonium chloride (polyDADMAC) can be coupled to a surface using a polymer binder, e.g., carboxylated polyethyleneimine (carboxylated polyethyleneimine, a polymer binder can act as an anionic polymer bound to polyDADMAC to provide an electrolyte complex, i.e., carboxylated polyethyleneimine (taught as polymer binder); however, a compound cannot be separated from its properties, regardless of what type of compound it is classified (i.e., polymer binder) can also be provided an polyelectrolyte complex with polyDADMAC).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide instantly claimed invention and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by the Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket and Shayko, as a whole, having a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 32 and 46 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney], Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket] and Shayko et al (CA 2916078) [Shayko] as applied to claims 30, 31, 43-45 and 48-55 above and further in view of Rabinowitz et al (USP 4064333, , of record) [Rabinowitz].
The teachings of Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket and Shayko, as a whole, are described above.
Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket and Shayko differ from the claims in that the documents do not teach that the diallyldimethylammonium fluoride.
However, Rabinowitz cures the deficiency.
Rabinowitz teaches polymers of diallyldimethylammonium fluoride directly from the quaternary fluoride monomer. In preferred instances, the present invention provides such polymers at intrinsic viscosities that are significantly higher than those obtained with the corresponding chloride monomer under identical conditions of reaction. This result is highly surprising and totally unexpected in view of the prior art teachings by providing higher molecular weight diallyldimethylammonium salt polymers than can be obtained by prior art procedures, whereby the process advantageously enables flocculation processes to be effectively run with lower polymer dosages than previously required, enables more effective use to be made of flocculate processes wherein extremely high molecular weight polymers are required, and advantageously eliminates the necessity for ion exchange to obtain diallyldimethylammonium fluoride polymers of which would provide motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to replace diallyldimethylammonium chloride with diallyldimethylammonium fluoride. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). (See MPEP 2144.07).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide instantly claimed invention and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket, Shayko and Rabinowitz, as a whole
Claim 42 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney], Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket] and Shayko et al (CA 2916078) [Shayko] as applied to claims 30, 31, 43-45 and 48-55 above and further in view of Karjalainen et al (Influence of Hydrophobic Anion on Solution Properties of PDMAEMA, Macromolecules p.2103, 2014, March, of record) [Karjalainen].
The teachings of Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket and Shayko, as a whole, are described above.
Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket and Shayko differ from the claims in that the documents do not teach that the polyethenimine that is quaternized with CF3SO2N-SO2CF3.
However, Karjalainen cures the deficiency,
Karjalainen teaches bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide (NTf2-) (CF3SO2N-SO2CF3.) is a monovalent anion that turns organic cations practically insoluble in water, owing to the fact the anion is not capable of forming strong hydrogen bonds, wherein CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 inability of the anion to form strong cation−anion hydrogen bonds, the weak cation−anion interaction, and the high charge delocalization resulting from exceptionally short nitrogen−sulfur bonds, thereby modifies the solubility of a polycation and turns the polymer water-insoluble and soluble in organic solvents (p.2103 to 2104; Scheme 1). Karjalainen teaches that bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide anion (i.e., counterion) is used to modify the solubility of the polycation. Moreover, (NTf2-) improves the thermal stability of the cationic polymer compared to traditional counterions like halides (p.2014, left col. top). Particularly, Karjalainen teaches that protonated PDMAEMA (i.e., polycationic polymer) can be turned water-insoluble in the presence of NTf2- (see Scheme 1: protonated PDMAEMA with counterion A- is water-soluble, whereas when ion is replaced with the counterion is NTf2-, then (i.e., PDMAEMA+- NTf2- is water-insoluble). Thus, one skilled in the art would have recognized from the teachings of Karjalainen that the solubility properties of a polycationic polymer can be optimized by varying the concentration of the CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 counterion having a reasonable expectation of success.
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide (NTf2-) enhances the thermal stability and modulates the solubility of polycationic polymers.
As discussed above, Gibney teaches cationic polyethylenimines (i.e., polycationic polymer) possess antibacterial activity and may be provided as non-viral vector systems for drug transport across cell membranes.
Furthermore, Gesser teaches indoor pollutant can be removed by passing the air in the home through a fiber glass filter with a thin layer coating of a polymeric material such as polyethylenimine.
Accordingly, one skilled in the art would have been motivated to swap the traditional ions, e.g., halides, of protonated polyethylenimine for NTf2- to optimize both solubility and thermal stability by using a single ion: bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide anion, having a reasonable expectation of success. Thus, replacing the traditional ions with NTf2- would have been driven by the need to fine-tune solubility and thermal stability where there is a need to reduce airborne pollutants, e.g., apply to an air filters in an automobile, house or building for the reduction of airborne pollutants entering the automobile or structure.
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide instantly claimed invention and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by the Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket, Shayko and Karjalainen, as a whole.
Claims 40 and 47 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney], Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket] and Shayko et al (CA 2916078) [Shayko] as applied to claims 30, 31, 43-45 and 48-55 above and further in view of Xia et al (Preparation and characterization of chemically-crosslinked polyethyleneimine films on hydroxylated surfaces for stable bactericidal coatings, Thin Solid Films p.1120, 2011, September) [Xia] and Bartley et al (US20060231487) [Bartley].
The teachings of Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket and Shayko, as a whole, are described above.
Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket and Shayko differ from the claims in that the documents do not teach that the antimicrobial composition of further comprises an adhesion promotor comprising a silane compound, wherein said adhesion promotor is bound to said air filter media.
However, Xia and Bartley, as a whole, cure the deficiency.
Xia teaches antimicrobial agents, polyethyleneimine (PEI) containing polycationic moieties are used to modify different types of substrates due to (1) their long-term antimicrobial activity with no resistance developed, (2) minimal cytotoxicity to mammalian cells, (3) regeneration upon loss of activity, and (4) biocidal ability for a broad spectrum of pathogenic microorganisms in brief times of contact (p.1120, right col.). Xia teaches surfaces with covalently attached PEI can be bactericidal through a contact mechanism. Since the functional groups are covalently attached, the surfaces can retain its antimicrobial property even after multiple uses (p.1120, right col.). Particularly, Xia teaches polyethyleneimine (PEI) is attached to glass surfaces using a silane compound, e.g., (3-aminopropyl) triethoxysilane (APTES).
Xia does not further teach APES is bound to a nonwoven air filter media, e.g., cellulose and/or fiberglass.
However, Bartley teaches filtration media coated with a composition comprising varied organic polymers, a crosslinking agent, a binder and a biocide, wherein the filter media is a nonwoven filter such as a cellulosic, fiberglass or mixture thereof and the crosslinking agent is a polyamine (i.e., reads on PEI) (Abstract; [0011-0012]; [0033-0034]; [0053]; See entire document).
As well as, Tiliket teaches (as discussed above) the chemical modification of the surface of non-woven cellulosic fiber filters, e.g., air filter media. comprising fixing polyethylenimine (PEI) on the surface in order to give it an antiviral property.
Accordingly, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air filter media of the modified Purschwitz et al. as to further comprise a silane compound such as APTES covalently bound to the air filter media taught by Tiliket. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide an air filter media that is coated with a silane compound comprising covalently attached APTES, whereby PEI is covalently bound to the silane compound so that the PEI is covalently attached to the silane compound so that the air filter media surfaces retain their antimicrobial properties even after multiple uses having a reasonable expectation of success.
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide instantly claimed invention and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by the cited references.
Claim 41 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purschwitz et al (US20140369953) [Purschwitz] in view of Lan et al (WO2016086012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022, Doc. No Eb) [Lan], Gesser (USP 4547350) [Gesser], Gibney et al (Poly(ethylene imine)s as Antimicrobial Agents with Selective Activity, Macro. BIosci, 2012, cited in IDS 7/20/2022 Doc. No. EQ) [Gibney], Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Shayko et al (CA 2916078) [Shayko] and Rabinowitz et al (USP 4064333) [Rabinowitz] as applied to claims 30, 31, 32, 43-45 and 48-55 above and further in view of Thomas et al (US 20090206038) [Thomas].
The teachings of Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket, Shayko and Rabinowitz, as a whole, are described above.
Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket, Shayko and Rabinowitz differ from the claims in that the documents do not teach that the antimicrobial composition further comprises a polycarboxylic acid comprising at least three carboxylic acid groups, wherein the said polycarboxylic acid is bound to said polyethylenimine.
However, Thomas cures the deficiency.
Thomas teaches that a cationic polymer to treat a support for medical use. (Title; Abstract) See entire document). Thomas teaches that the organic polyacid may be a polycarboxylic acid, in particular comprising at least three carboxylic acid groups, preferably an organic tribasic acid. The polycarboxylic acid in the preferred implementation is citric acid, i.e., citric acid is the preferred polyacid according to the teachings of Thomas) [0109]. Thomas teaches that citric acid increases the adsorption of polyethyleneimine (PEI) on to a base support, e.g., beads ([0109]; [0146-1047]; [0174]; [0336]; See entire document).
Thus, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the antimicrobial composition comprising poly(ethylenimine) (PEI), and poly(Diallyl dimethyl ammonium fluoride as taught by Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser , Gibney, Tiliket and Rabinowitz, as a whole, to further (preferably) comprise a polycarboxylic acid: citric comprising three carboxylic acids. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to increase the adsorption of polyethyleneimine (PEI) onto the air filter media surface (e.g., made of cellulosic and/or fiberglass or mixture thereof) in accordance with the teachings of Thomas having a reasonable expectation of success.
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide instantly claimed invention and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by the Purschwitz, Lan, Gesser, Gibney, Tiliket, Shayko, Rabinowitz and Thomas.
Response to Arguments
Applicants argue that the pending claims have been amended, and the claim amendment has rendered the obviousness rejections moot.
In view of the foregoing, the rejections based on Cheng (allegedly disclosing gold nanoparticles), McKee (allegedly disclosing gold catalyst), and Mukai (allegedly teaching gold particles) have been rendered moot.
Applicants’ arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, because in view of the New Grounds of Rejection necessitated by the claim amendments the teachings of Shayko cure the deficiencies directed a photocatalytic active in visible light, because Shayko teaches graphene (as claimed) that is effective at the removal of varied air pollutants, as described above, thereby making instant claims prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as detailed in the 103 rejections set forth above.
New Grounds of Double Patenting Rejections necessitated by claim amendments
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 30, 31, 32, 42-46 and 48-55 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,357,718 (herein ‘718) in view of Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Rabinowitz et al (USP 40643333) [Rabinowitz] and Shayko et al (CA 2916078) [Shayko].
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Instant Claims and ‘718 claims are directed to common subject matter.
Instant Claims are directed an antimicrobial composition comprising an air filter media and a polydiallyldialkylammonium salt coupled to said air filter media, further comprising a polyethylenimine coupled to said air filter media, wherein the diallyldialkylammonium salt comprises a diallyldimethylammonium fluoride, further including particles that are photocatalytically active in visible light selected from the group consisting of graphene, a transition metal sulfide, a transition metal selenide, a dye sensitizer, a conjugated polymer, and a noble metal, further comprising an adhesion promotor comprising a silane compound, wherein said adhesion promotor is bound to said air filter media;, further comprising a polycarboxylic acid comprising at least three carboxylic acid groups, wherein said polycarboxylic acid is bound to said polyethylenimine; wherein said polyethylenimine is quaternized with counterions some of which are CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 counterions, further comprising an anionic polymer bound to said polydiallyldialkylammonium salt in a polyelectrolyte complex, wherein thediallyldialkylammonium salt comprises diallyldimethylammonium fluoride.
‘718 claims are directed to an antimicrobial composition consisting of polyethylenimine (PEI), a polydiallyldialkylammonium halide; an adhesive promotor, e.g., silane compound, a polyacid.
‘718 claims differ from Instant Claims in that the ‘718 claims to not recite an antimicrobial composition comprising polydiallyldialkyl ammonium salt further comprising PEI coupled to the air filter, wherein the diallyldialkylammonium salt comprises a diallyldimethylammonium fluoride; wherein said polyethylenimine is quaternized with counterions some of which are CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 counterions, and further including particles that are photocatalytically active in visible light selected from the group consisting of graphene, a transition metal sulfide, a transition metal selenide, a dye sensitizer, a conjugated polymer,
However, Tiliket, Rabinowitz, Karjalainen and Shayko, as a whole, cure the deficiencies.
Tiliket teaches that chemical modification of the surface of low-cost non-woven cellulosic fiber filters by fixing polyethylenimine (PEI) in order to give them an antiviral property. Tiliket teaches that the best virus capture factor was obtained with 2 layers of Kimwipes functionalized with a PEI solution that were placed inside a commercial medical mask (i.e., air filter media). Tiliket teaches that the modified masks allowed the removal of 99.999% of a sprayed solution of bacteriophages. Tiliket teaches that PEI is electrostatically attached to the fiber (3.2, Improvement of PEI immobilization, right col.). Moreover, Tiliket teaches that results suggests that applications for systems involving PEI-supported fibers, such as air purifiers (See 4. Conclusions, p.350).
Rabinowitz teaches polymers of diallyldimethylammonium fluoride directly from the quaternary fluoride monomer. In preferred
instances, the present invention provides such polymers at intrinsic viscosities. that are significantly higher than those obtained with the corresponding chloride monomer under identical conditions of reaction. This result is highly surprising and totally unexpected in view of the prior art teachings by providing higher molecular weight diallyldimethylammonium salt polymers than can .be obtained by prior art procedures, whereby the process enables flocculation processes to be effectively run with lower polymer dosages than previously required, enables more effective use to be made of flocculate processes wherein extremely high molecular. weight polymers are required, and advantageously eliminates the necessity for ion exchange to obtain diallyldimethylammonium fluoride polymers.
Karjalainen teaches bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide (NTf2-) (CF3SO2N-SO2CF3.) is a monovalent anion that turns organic cations practically insoluble in water, owing to the fact the anion is not capable of forming strong hydrogen bonds, wherein CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 inability of the anion to form strong cation−anion hydrogen bonds, the weak cation−anion interaction, and the high charge delocalization resulting from exceptionally short nitrogen−sulfur bonds, thereby modifies the solubility of a polycation and turns the polymer water-insoluble and soluble in organic solvents (p.2103 to 2104; Scheme 1). Karjalainen teaches that bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide anion (i.e., counterion) is used to modify the solubility of the polycation. Moreover, (NTf2-) improves the thermal stability of the cationic polymer compared to traditional counterions like halides (p.2014, left col. top). Particularly, Karjalainen teaches that protonated PDMAEMA (i.e., polycationic polymer) can be turned water-insoluble in the presence of NTf2- (see Scheme 1: protonated PDMAEMA with counterion A- is water-soluble, whereas when ion is replaced with the counterion is NTf2-, then (i.e., PDMAEMA+- NTf2- is water-insoluble). Thus, one skilled in the art would have recognized from the teachings of Karjalainen that the solubility properties of a polycationic polymer can be optimized by varying the concentration of the CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 counterion having a reasonable expectation of success.
Shayko teaches photocatalytic composite materials for decomposition of air pollutants (Title; Abstract; [0001]; [0002]; [0011; [0014]; [0033]; [0039]; [0045]; [0054]; [0060]). Shayko teaches composite materials having the ability to decompose airborne pollutants, such as NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), upon exposure to visible light or sunlight [0015]. Shayko teaches the photocatalytic composite materials are efficient catalysts for the decomposition of airborne pollutants, and maintain a high level of activity after hours of catalytic decomposition [0070]. Shayko teaches visible-light composite material comprising titanium dioxide, graphene oxide and graphene for the decomposition of NOx and/or volatile organic compounds, wherein the surface is a pollution control apparatus (VOCs) ([0054]; [0060]; Claims 1. 10, 12, 18, 21 and 25). Shayko teaches that the term "graphene" as used herein refers to a polycyclic aromatic molecule comprising a plurality of carbon atoms connected to each other by a covalent bond. The plurality of carbon atoms may form six-membered rings as a standard 20 repeating unit, or may further include 5-membered rings and/or 7-membered rings [0036]. Shayko teaches visible-light photocatalytic composite material for the decomposition of airborne pollutants that are formulated into compositions for application to surfaces, for example, where there is a need or desire to reduce airborne pollutants [0062-0064; [0066]. For example, the photocatalytic composite material may be applied to an air filter in an automobile, house or building for the reduction of airborne pollutants entering the automobile or structure, wherein the air filter surface is exposed to an artificial light source and the photocatalytic composite material catalyzes the decomposition of airborne pollutants flowing through the air filter ([0067]; See entire document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Patent ‘718 in accordance with the teaching of Tiliket, Rabinowitz, Karjalainen and Shayko, as a whole. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide an antimicrobial composition comprising polyDADMAC and PEI comprising an air filter media that further comprises particles of photocatalytically active in visible light, e.g., graphene, to be effective at removing varied air pollutants, e.g., NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Thereby, enhancing the overall efficacy of the modified antimicrobial composition comprising an air filter media to optimize the removal of diverse air pollutants having a reasonable expectation of success.
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide instantly claimed invention and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the subject matter of the ‘718 claims and the teachings of Tiliket, Rabinowitz, Karjalainen and Shayko, as a whole.
Claims 30-32, 35, 36 and 40-43 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of U.S. Patent No. 11426343 (herein ‘343) I view of Tiliket et al (A new material for airborne virus filtration, Chemical Engineering Journal September p.341, 2011) [Tiliket], Rabinowitz et al (USP 40643333) [Rabinowitz] and Shayko et al (CA 2916078) [Shayko].
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Instant Claims and ‘525 claims are directed to common subject matter.
Instant Claims are directed an antimicrobial composition comprising an air filter media and a polydiallyldialkylammonium salt coupled to said air filter media, further comprising a polyethylenimine coupled to said air filter media, wherein the diallyldialkylammonium salt comprises a diallyldimethylammonium fluoride, further including particles that are photocatalytically active in visible light selected from the group consisting of graphene, a transition metal sulfide, a transition metal selenide, a dye sensitizer, a conjugated polymer, and a noble metal, further comprising an adhesion promotor comprising a silane compound, wherein said adhesion promotor is bound to said air filter media;, further comprising a polycarboxylic acid comprising at least three carboxylic acid groups, wherein said polycarboxylic acid is bound to said polyethylenimine; wherein said polyethylenimine is quaternized with counterions some of which are CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 counterions, further comprising an anionic polymer bound to said polydiallyldialkylammonium salt in a polyelectrolyte complex, wherein thediallyldialkylammonium salt comprises diallyldimethylammonium fluoride.
‘343 claims are directed to an antimicrobial composition consisting of polyethylenimine (PEI), a polydiallyldialkylammonium halide; an adhesive promotor, e.g., silane compound, a polyacidand and particles that are photocatalytically active in visible light that are graphene.
‘343 claims differ from Instant Claims in that the ‘718 claims to not recite an antimicrobial composition comprising polydiallyldialkyl ammonium salt further comprising PEI coupled to an air filter, wherein the diallyldialkylammonium salt comprises a diallyldimethylammonium fluoride; wherein said polyethylenimine is quaternized with counterions some of which are CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 counterions.
However, Tiliket, Rabinowitz and Karjalainen, as a whole, cure the deficiencies.
Tiliket teaches that chemical modification of the surface of low-cost non-woven cellulosic fiber filters by fixing polyethylenimine (PEI) in order to give them an antiviral property. Tiliket teaches that the best virus capture factor was obtained with 2 layers of Kimwipes functionalized with a PEI solution that were placed inside a commercial medical mask (i.e., air filter media). Tiliket teaches that the modified masks allowed the removal of 99.999% of a sprayed solution of bacteriophages. Tiliket teaches that PEI is electrostatically attached to the fiber (3.2, Improvement of PEI immobilization, right col.). Moreover, Tiliket teaches that results suggests that applications for systems involving PEI-supported fibers, such as air purifiers (See 4. Conclusions, p.350).
Rabinowitz teaches polymers of diallyldimethylammonium fluoride directly from the quaternary fluoride monomer. In preferred
instances, the present invention provides such polymers at intrinsic viscosities. that are significantly higher than those obtained with the corresponding chloride monomer under identical conditions of reaction. This result is highly surprising and totally unexpected in view of the prior art teachings by providing higher molecular weight diallyldimethylammonium salt polymers than can .be obtained by prior art procedures, whereby the process enables flocculation processes to be effectively run with lower polymer dosages than previously required, enables more effective use to be made of flocculate processes wherein extremely high molecular. weight polymers are required, and advantageously eliminates the necessity for ion exchange to obtain diallyldimethylammonium fluoride polymers.
Karjalainen teaches bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide (NTf2-) (CF3SO2N-SO2CF3.) is a monovalent anion that turns organic cations practically insoluble in water, owing to the fact the anion is not capable of forming strong hydrogen bonds, wherein CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 inability of the anion to form strong cation−anion hydrogen bonds, the weak cation−anion interaction, and the high charge delocalization resulting from exceptionally short nitrogen−sulfur bonds, thereby modifies the solubility of a polycation and turns the polymer water-insoluble and soluble in organic solvents (p.2103 to 2104; Scheme 1). Karjalainen teaches that bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide anion (i.e., counterion) is used to modify the solubility of the polycation. Moreover, (NTf2-) improves the thermal stability of the cationic polymer compared to traditional counterions like halides (p.2014, left col. top). Particularly, Karjalainen teaches that protonated PDMAEMA (i.e., polycationic polymer) can be turned water-insoluble in the presence of NTf2- (see Scheme 1: protonated PDMAEMA with counterion A- is water-soluble, whereas when ion is replaced with the counterion is NTf2-, then (i.e., PDMAEMA+- NTf2- is water-insoluble). Thus, one skilled in the art would have recognized from the teachings of Karjalainen that the solubility properties of a polycationic polymer can be optimized by varying the concentration of the CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 counterion having a reasonable expectation of success.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Patent ‘343 in accordance with the teaching of Tiliket, Rabinowitz and Karjalainen, as a whole. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide an antimicrobial composition comprising polyDADMAC and PEI comprising an air filter media that further comprises diallyldimethylammonium fluoride and polyethylenimine is quaternized with counterions some of which are CF3SO2N-SO2CF3 counterions, thereby, providing a modified antimicrobial composition comprising an air filter media and enhancing the overall efficacy of the modified antimicrobial composition comprising an air filter media to optimize the removal of diverse air pollutants having a reasonable expectation of success.
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide instantly claimed invention and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the subject matter of the ‘343 claims and the teachings of Tiliket, Rabinowitz and Karjalainen, as a whole.
Response to Arguments
Applicants argue that the obviousness-type double patenting rejections cannot stand in view the claim amendment in the Claim Set filed 4/25/2025.
Applicants’ arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, because in view of the New Grounds of Double Patenting Rejections necessitated by the claim amendments the teachings of Shayko cure the deficiencies directed a photocatalytic active in visible light, because Shayko teaches graphene (as claimed) that is effective at the removal of diverse air pollutants, as detailed in the Double Patenting Rejections set forth above.
Conclusions
No claim is allowed.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thurman Wheeler whose telephone number is (571)-270-1307. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00am-6:00pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Blanchard can be reached on 571-272-0827. 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.
/T.W./ Examiner, Art Unit 1619
/SARAH ALAWADI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1619
Prosecution Insights