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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/13/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sidorkin (Quantum-chemical study of pentacoordinated silicon compounds: Si-substituted (O--Si)dimethyl(N-acetylacetamidomethyl)silanes).
Regarding claims 1, 5, 7, and 9, Sidorkin discloses a compound selected from the group consisting of Formula I see below:
PNG
media_image1.png
64
383
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
128
188
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein R= Me, Me, F, wherein a=1, Sp is CH2, and Y is as set forth below (14) and b=0.
PNG
media_image3.png
106
88
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kalikhman (The influence of Si substituents on the degree of silicon intramolecular coordination and migration barriers of the Si ← O-bond in silafunctional [(N-acetylacetamido)methyl]dimethylsilanes from carbon-13 and silicon-29 NMR).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Kalikhman discloses a compound selected from the group consisting of Formula I see below:
PNG
media_image1.png
64
383
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein R is Me, Me, and 2 halogen elements (I, Cl, Br), Y is Ac2N (14) as set forth below and Sp is CH2, wherein a=1 or 2, and b=0.
PNG
media_image4.png
100
110
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pepe (US 3,511,866).
Regarding claims 1-7, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 15, Pepe discloses a compound selected from the group consisting of (see C1/L1-72):
(R)4-a — Si —(Sp-Y)a —Z-b
wherein a can range from 1 to 3, b is 0, wherein R is fluorine, Sp is a linear alkylenyl and Y is OCN.
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.
Claim(s) 8, 11 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pepe (US 3,511,866) as applied to claims 1, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 15 above, and further in view of Syret (US 2017/0283443 A1).
Regarding claims 8, 11 and 14, Pepe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Pepe does not disclose that when a=2 or 3, or b=1 and Z is R.
Syret discloses that a spacer group between Si and a cyanide group can have a substituent methyl group attached (see examples 9 and 10, one spacer group has a methyl group attached and one does not).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify a single spacer groups of Pepe by attaching a substituent methyl group as disclosed by Syret because Syret discloses it is possible to do so and furthermore one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out such a modification, and the results would be reasonably predictable.
Modified Pepe now discloses now discloses when a=2 or 3, b=1 and Z is R.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVINA PILLAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1180. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at 517-272-1307. 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.
DEVINA PILLAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/DEVINA PILLAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights