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 .
This action is responsive to Applicant’s response to election/restriction and amendment filed 10/14/2025.
Claims 1-18 and 20 are currently pending.
The Drawings filed 11/29/2022 are approved by the examiner.
The IDS statement filed 04/25/2023 has been considered. An initialed copy accompanies this action.
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-10, 16, and 18, and sugar alcohol as the species of phase change material in the reply filed on 10/14/2025 are both acknowledged. It is noted that Applicant added claim 20 which for purposes of examination/restriction is grouped with the elected Group I.
Applicant identified claims 1-10, 16, 18, and 20 as reading on the elected species. Claims 1-10, 16, 18, and 20 were searched and examined only to the extent that they read on the elected species, as they were found not to be allowable.
Claims 11-15 and 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention/species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretation
For purposes of claim interpretation, it is noted that claim 1 recites a phase-change complex (i.e., composition) comprising a phase change material "complexed" with a polysaccharide and claim 16 recites a phase change bio-complex (i.e., composition) comprising, inter alia, a polysaccharide and a "complexed" phase change material. The Office construes the term "complexed" as merely meaning the component(s) are mixed/blended/present-together/etc. within the composition. This interpretation is very reasonable and supported by the present application's specification in view of the specification's working examples and Table 1 stating/showing the phase change complexes are made by mixing polysaccharides and phase change materials together.
Also, it is noted claim 16's recitation that the polysaccharide is selected from polysaccharides of one or more of structural, storage, or bacterial categories is clearly construed as meaning the polysaccharide is selected from polysaccharides of one or more of structural, storage, or bacterial genera, i.e., selected from structural polysaccharides, storage polysaccharides, or bacterial polysaccharides.
Claim Objections
Claims 7 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 7, Applicant is suggested to amend "the phase-change material" to read as "the phase change material" in order to match the precise antecedent basis/terminology of the parent claim. While the species is withdrawn, Applicant is also suggested to amend “sodium carbonate, decahydrate” to read as “sodium carbonate decahydrate” removing the comma in order to improve clarity in the claim.
In claim 8, Applicant is suggested to amend "the group consisting, of" to "the group consisting of" removing the comma in order to improve clarity and grammar in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 4, 6, 9, 18, and 20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites an ionic agent comprising at least one salt that is "selected from the group consisting of salts comprising di- and multivalent cations or transition metals". The term "consisting of" has the meaning that the claim/limitation is closed to (excludes) any ingredient not specified in the claim. However, the term "comprising" has the meaning that the claim/limitation is open to (does not exclude) unrecited ingredients. See MPEP 2111.03. This renders it seriously unclear if the claim is closed to the recited di- and multivalent cations or transition metals as the salts or may improperly include other unrecited salts. It is unclear what other alternatives, if any, are intended to be encompassed by the claim. See MPEP 2173.05(h). Applicant is also requested to correct/clarify the semicolon punctuation following the indefinite limitation ("; and alkali metal salts of organic acids or polymeric oxyanions."). Is this another one of the salts nested under the "comprising" language or alternative to the salts with the "comprising" language under the "consisting of" language? For purposes of further examination, the limitation(s) is construed that the salt is selected from the group consisting of divalent cation salts, multivalent cation salts, transition metal salts, alkali metal salts of organic acids, and alkali metal salts of polymeric oxyanions.
In claim 6, the term "the complexed phase-change material" lacks sufficient antecedent basis in the claims. The parent claim recites "a phase change material complexed [i.e., mixed] with a polysaccharide" but not a "complexed phase-change material". For purposes of further examination, the term "the complexed phase-change material" is construed as meaning the "phase change material" of the parent claim.
For purposes of additional claim interpretation, it is noted that claim 6 recites a limitation to a "soft matter". The limitation(s) of a "soft matter" are construed as clear and definite because the claim describes the soft matter as "having a homogenous and uniform structure without leakage of the complexed phase-change material [interpreted as the phase change material, Id.]" and as being "resilient". However, note that this claim is fairly broad via the "arranged to be" language meaning the composition is merely capable of performing/meeting the recited limitations and does not require actual steps of doing so.
Claim 9 recites the composition of claim 1 "comprising 5 to 50 % by weight of the total weight of the complex of the polysaccharide and up to 20 % by weight of the total weight of the total weight of the complex of an ionic agent, and wherein the remainder comprises the phase-change complex." It is seriously unclear what components the claim is referring to. The parent claim recites "a phase change material complexed with a polysaccharide" construed as a phase change material mixed with a polysaccharide not a "complex of a polysaccharide". Additionally, there is no "complex of an ionic agent" in the parent claim. Since it is unclear what "the complex of the polysaccharide" and "the complex of an ionic agent" is referring to, it is also unclear what concentrations are required. Additionally, the limitation regarding "the remainder comprises the phase-change complex" is also seriously unclear because the claims/invention are to a "phase-change complex". The phase-change complex (composition) should require 100% of itself (the phase-change complex) and it is unclear how the phase-change complex (composition) can comprise any less than 100% (the remainder after 5-70% by weight of other components) of itself.
There is a great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of claim 9 due to the identified limitations therein, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would not be apprised as to the scope of the invention. Where there is a great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of a claim, it would not be proper to reject such a claim on the basis of prior art. As stated in In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962), a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should not be based on considerable speculation about the meaning of terms employed in a claim or assumptions that must be made as to the scope of the claims. See MPEP 2173.06.
In claim 18, it is unclear what is meant by the composition being in the form of "a concentrated liquid or gel". The term “concentrated” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term is also subjective and its meaning would vary among skilled artisans. For purposes of further examination the claim will be broadly construed as the form of a liquid or gel will read on the limitation and some particular concentration of component(s) is not required.
Claim 20 recites "The phase change bio-complex according to claim 1,". However, the preamble lacks sufficient antecedent basis and renders the claim indefinite. Claim 1 is drawn to a "phase-change complex" not a "phase change bio-complex". For purposes of further examination the claim is construed as meaning the composition of claim 1 further comprises one of the recited ionic agent ions.
Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 & 103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 1-8, 10, 16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1,2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kakiuchi et al. (US 5,785,885 A).
As to claims 1 and 3, Kakiuchi et al. teach a heat storage material comprising at least one sugar alcohol and a salt (abstract). The composition utilizes a latent heat of fusion of the sugar alcohol (col. 1 lines 4-7), meaning the sugar alcohol is disclosed as a phase change material and the heat storage material is therefore a phase change composition. The composition may further contain a thickener such as a water-insoluble super-absorbent polymer, carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium alginate, potassium alginate, or fumed silica (col. 2 line 67 to col. 3 line 4). The carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium alginate, potassium alginate species (three of the five disclosed thickeners) are polysaccharides. The direct disclosure that the composition (comprising a sugar alcohol phase change material) may further comprise a thickener where the majority (three of five) of the thickener species are polysaccharides meets the claimed limitations of a composition comprising a phase change material complexed (i.e., mixed) with a polysaccharide. A person of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisage the claimed combination of components from the cited teachings of the reference.
In the event the cited teachings of the reference somehow do not meet the claimed limitations under the meaning of anticipation, the claimed limitations are nevertheless obvious over the same cited teachings. At the time of the effective filing date it would have been very obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at a composition comprising a phase change material complexed, i.e., mixed, with a polysaccharide from the cited teachings of Kakiuchi et al. because Kakiuchi et al. directly invites inclusion of a polysaccharide with their sugar alcohol phase change material in order to thicken the composition.
As to claim 2, Kakiuchi et al.’s polysaccharide thickeners (carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium alginate, potassium alginate, Id.) read on, at least, the polysaccharide being selected from storage and/or structural polysaccharides derived from plants.
As to claim 4, Kakiuchi et al.’s salt component reads on the composition further comprising an ionic agent/salt selected from the group consisting of divalent, multivalent, or transition metal ions under the same at-once envisaged and/or obvious rationales. The salts may include phosphates, sulfates, pyrophosphates, carbonates, calcium salts of inorganic acids, aluminum salts of inorganic acids, silver salts of inorganic acids, silver halides, and polyvalent metal salts of fatty acids, including many di/multivalent cationic salts and salts of an acid as examples thereof (col. 2 lines 28-46). Alternatively, the sodium and potassium elements of the sodium alginate and potassium alginate polysaccharide thickener species (Id.) read on the composition further comprising an alkali metal salt of organic acid ionic agent/salt.
As to claim 5, Kakiuchi et al. teach the composition is capable of storing heat and has a latent heat of fusion (Id., see also col. 3), which reads on the claimed capability of discharging heat upon crystallization of the composition. Kakiuchi et al. further teach the composition has a homogenous and uniform structure (the components are uniformly mixed and dispersed, col. 3).
As to claim 6, Kakiuchi et al.’s composition meets the claimed broad limitations that the composition is arranged to be charged with heat at a constant melting temperature so as to form a thermally and structurally resilient physical soft matter having a homogenous and uniform structure without leakage of the phase change material (the composition’s components are uniformly mixed and dispersed and the sugar alcohol component has a latent heat of fusion, i.e., capability of reversibly freezing and melting at a certain temperature, Id.; the composition may also be in the form of a capsule or microcapsule which contains the composition without leakage, col. 3).
As to claim 7, Kakiuchi et al. teach the sugar alcohol comprises erythritol or mannitol (abstract).
As to claim 8, Kakiuchi et al. teach the polysaccharide may be an alginic acid (sodium alginate or potassium alginate, Id., which are salts of alginic acid).
As to claim 10, it is noted the application’s specification indicates the ionic cross-linking is imparted by the mere provision of di/multivalent cations including alkaline earth or transition metals, and/or salts of an acid. Kakiuchi et al.’s salt component reads on the limitation that the composition is ionically cross-linked under the same at-once envisaged and/or obvious rationales as the disclosed salt are substantially the same as those disclosed. The salts may include phosphates, sulfates, pyrophosphates, carbonates, calcium salts of inorganic acids, aluminum salts of inorganic acids, silver salts of inorganic acids, silver halides, and polyvalent metal salts of fatty acids, including many di/multivalent cationic salts and salts of an acid as examples thereof (col. 2 lines 28-46).
As to claim 20, Kakiuchi et al.’s salt component reads on the composition further comprising an ionic agent selected from the group consisting of alkaline earth and transition metal ions under the same at-once envisaged and/or obvious rationales. The salts may include phosphates, sulfates, pyrophosphates, carbonates, calcium salts of inorganic acids, aluminum salts of inorganic acids, silver salts of inorganic acids, silver halides, and polyvalent metal salts of fatty acids, including many di/multivalent cationic salts and salts of an acid as examples thereof (col. 2 lines 28-46). Alternatively, the sodium and potassium elements of the sodium alginate and potassium alginate polysaccharide thickener species (Id.) read on the composition further comprising an alkali metal ionic agent.
As to claim 16, Kakiuchi et al. teach a heat storage material comprising at least one sugar alcohol and a salt (abstract). The composition utilizes a latent heat of fusion of the sugar alcohol (col. 1 lines 4-7), meaning the sugar alcohol is disclosed as a phase change material and the heat storage material is therefore a phase change composition. The recitation of a phase change bio-complex merely amounts to a phase change composition. The composition may further contain a thickener such as a water-insoluble super-absorbent polymer, carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium alginate, potassium alginate, or fumed silica (col. 2 line 67 to col. 3 line 4). The carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium alginate, potassium alginate species (three of the five disclosed thickeners) are structural and/or storage polysaccharides. The direct disclosure that the composition (comprising a sugar alcohol phase change material) may further comprise a thickener where the majority (three of five) of the thickener species are polysaccharides meets the claimed limitations of a composition comprising at least one polysaccharide and a complexed (i.e., mixed) phase change material. A person of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisage the claimed combination of components from the cited teachings of the reference.
In the event the cited teachings of the reference somehow do not meet the claimed limitations under the meaning of anticipation, the claimed limitations are nevertheless obvious over the same cited teachings. At the time of the effective filing date it would have been very obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at a composition comprising a polysaccharide complexed, i.e., mixed, with a phase change material from the cited teachings of Kakiuchi et al. because Kakiuchi et al. directly invites inclusion of a polysaccharide with their sugar alcohol phase change material in order to thicken the composition.
Any remaining limitations in the claim are optional. However, Kakiuchi et al.’s salt component reads on the claimed optional ionic cross linker derived from di/multivalent cations and/or acid salts under the same at-once envisaged and/or obvious rationales. The salts may include phosphates, sulfates, pyrophosphates, carbonates, calcium salts of inorganic acids, aluminum salts of inorganic acids, silver salts of inorganic acids, silver halides, and polyvalent metal salts of fatty acids, including many di/multivalent cationic salts and salts of an acid as examples thereof (col. 2 lines 28-46).
As to claim 18, the teachings of Kakiuchi et al. read on the claimed limitations that the phase change bio-complex (phase change composition) is in the form of a liquid, gel, or is fully dehydrated. The examples demonstrate the compositions merely contain the components and no water is present, reading on a fully dehydrated form. Alternatively, the reference discloses the sugar alcohol is utilized for its latent heat of fusion and has an ability to reversibly melt and freeze (Id.); the features that the combination of a melting and freezing sugar alcohol phase change material (ability for the phase change material to be either a liquid or solid, depending on temperature) and a polysaccharide thickener being in a liquid form or a gel form is inherent from the cited teachings of the reference under an anticipation rationale and/or would flow naturally from the cited teachings of the reference under an obviousness rationale.
Claims 1-8, 10, 16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Suzuki et al. (JP H11-293236 A). Citations to the reference are with respect to the supplied English language machine translation of the reference unless otherwise specified.
As to claims 1 and 3, Suzuki et al. teach a cold storage material comprising water, starch, a polyhydric alcohol, and an electrolyte (abstract). Starch is a polysaccharide. The polyhydric alcohol comprises glycerin, diglycerin, polyglycerin, sorbitol, propylene glycol, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, or polyethylene glycol (p.2). The glycerin, sorbitol, and ethylene glycol (three of the eight disclosed polyhydric alcohols) are phase change material sugar alcohols. The direct disclosure that the composition (comprising a starch polysaccharide) may further comprise a polyhydric alcohol where several (three of eight) of the polyhydric alcohol species are phase change material sugar alcohols meets the claimed limitations of a composition comprising a phase change material complexed (i.e., mixed) with a polysaccharide. A person of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisage the claimed combination of components from the cited teachings of the reference.
In the event the cited teachings of the reference somehow do not meet the claimed limitations under the meaning of anticipation, the claimed limitations are nevertheless obvious over the same cited teachings. At the time of the effective filing date it would have been very obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at a composition comprising a phase change material complexed, i.e., mixed, with a polysaccharide from the cited teachings of Suzuki et al. because Suzuki et al. directly invites inclusion of a sugar alcohol with their starch polysaccharide in order to obtain a cold storage material.
As to claim 2, Suzuki et al.’s starch reads on, at least, the polysaccharide being selected from storage and/or structural polysaccharides derived from plants.
As to claim 4, Suzuki et al.’s electrolyte component reads on the composition further comprising an ionic agent/salt selected from the group consisting of divalent or multivalent cations under the same at-once envisaged and/or obvious rationales. The electrolyte includes sodium chloride, aluminum chloride, barium chloride, calcium chloride, sodium nitrate, sodium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, calcium monohydrogen phosphate, calcium dihydrogen phosphate, disodium hydrogen phosphate, or sodium dihydrogen phosphate (p.2), which include many species that include divalent cations and/or multivalent cations.
As to claim 5, Suzuki et al. teach the composition is made by mixing the components well, processing through a twin-extruder, and pressing to obtain a flexible gel (p.2). The composition having a homogenous and uniform structure is either inherent or would flow naturally from the cited teachings of the reference. The additional limitation that the composition is capable of discharging heat upon crystallization of the composition is also inherent or would also flow naturally from the cited teachings of the reference as Suzuki et al. teach the a composition comprising the same components and species, especially sugar alcohol, as recited.
As to claim 6, Suzuki et al.’s composition meets the claimed broad limitations that the composition is arranged to be charged with heat at a constant melting temperature so as to form a thermally and structurally resilient physical soft matter having a homogenous and uniform structure without leakage of the phase change material (the composition is a cold storage material comprising the same components and species, especially sugar alcohol, as recited, where the components are mixed well, processed through a twin-extruder, and pressed to obtain a flexible gel, Id.; the reference composition’s form as a flexible gel composite of the recited components inherently meets or obviously meets, i.e., flow naturally, there is no leakage of the phase change material, i.e., sugar alcohol component).
As to claim 7, Suzuki et al. teach the sugar alcohol/polyhydric alcohol comprises glycerol (glycerin) or sorbitol (Id.).
As to claim 8, the composition comprises starch (Id.) which reads on the claimed polysaccharide.
As to claim 10, it is noted the application’s specification indicates the ionic cross-linking is imparted by the mere provision of di/multivalent cations including alkaline earth or transition metals, and/or salts of an acid. Suzuki et al.’s electrolyte component reads on the limitation that the composition is ionically cross-linked under the same at-once envisaged and/or obvious rationales as the disclosed salt are substantially the same as those disclosed. The electrolyte includes sodium chloride, aluminum chloride, barium chloride, calcium chloride, sodium nitrate, sodium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, calcium monohydrogen phosphate, calcium dihydrogen phosphate, disodium hydrogen phosphate, or sodium dihydrogen phosphate (p.2), which all include or are derived from divalent cations and/or multivalent cations, including divalent and multivalent alkaline earth or transition metals, and/or salts of an acid.
As to claim 20, Suzuki et al.’s electrolyte component reads on the ionic agent selected from the group consisting of alkali metal and alkaline earth ions. The electrolyte includes sodium chloride, aluminum chloride, barium chloride, calcium chloride, sodium nitrate, sodium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, calcium monohydrogen phosphate, calcium dihydrogen phosphate, disodium hydrogen phosphate, or sodium dihydrogen phosphate (p.2), which all include alkali metal or alkaline earth ions.
As to claim 16, Suzuki et al. teach a cold storage material comprising water, starch, a polyhydric alcohol, and an electrolyte (abstract). The recitation of a phase change bio-complex merely amounts to a phase change composition. Starch is a structural and/or storage polysaccharide. The polyhydric alcohol comprises glycerin, diglycerin, polyglycerin, sorbitol, propylene glycol, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, or polyethylene glycol (p.2). The glycerin, sorbitol, and ethylene glycol (three of the eight disclosed polyhydric alcohols) are phase change material sugar alcohols. The direct disclosure that the composition (comprising a starch polysaccharide) may further comprise a polyhydric alcohol where several (three of eight) of the polyhydric alcohol species are phase change material sugar alcohols meets the claimed limitations of a composition comprising at least one polysaccharide and a complexed (i.e., mixed) phase change material. A person of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisage the claimed combination of components from the cited teachings of the reference.
In the event the cited teachings of the reference somehow do not meet the claimed limitations under the meaning of anticipation, the claimed limitations are nevertheless obvious over the same cited teachings. At the time of the effective filing date it would have been very obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at a composition comprising a polysaccharide complexed, i.e., mixed, with a phase change material from the cited teachings of Suzuki et al. because Suzuki et al. directly invites inclusion of a sugar alcohol with their starch polysaccharide in order to obtain a cold storage material.
Any remaining limitations in the claim are optional. However, Suzuki et al.’s electrolyte component reads on the claimed optional ionic cross linker derived from di/multivalent cations and/or acid salts under the same at-once envisaged and/or obvious rationales. The electrolyte includes sodium chloride, aluminum chloride, barium chloride, calcium chloride, sodium nitrate, sodium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, calcium monohydrogen phosphate, calcium dihydrogen phosphate, disodium hydrogen phosphate, or sodium dihydrogen phosphate (p.2), which all include or are derived from divalent cations, multivalent cations, and/or salts of an acid.
As to claim 18, Suzuki et al. teach the cold storage composition is in the form of a flexible gel (p.2).
Claim 10 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (JP H11-293236 A) as applied to claims 1-8, 10, 16, 18, and 20 above, and further in view of Sabin et al. (US 6,099,555 A) and Gu et al. (US 2014/0113821 A1).
The disclosure of Suzuki et al. is relied upon as set forth above.
Alternatively regarding the claimed limitations that the composition is ionically cross linked, Suzuki et al. fail to teach that the polysaccharide component, starch, in their cold storage composition is ionically crosslinked.
However, Sabin et al. is similarly drawn to a gel cold pack composition, i.e., a cold storage composition, comprising starch as a gelling material therein alongside a phase change material (col. 1 lines 49-67) where starches are known to be modified by crosslinking to increase their shear resistance, heat resistance, and resistance to high or low hydrogen-ion concentrations (col. 5 lines 22-25). Gu et al. is similarly drawn to polysaccharide gel modifications and teaches polysaccharide-based gels such as starches may be routinely ionically cross-linked by contacting the polysaccharide gel with a metal ion (such as a calcium ion, iron ion, aluminum ion, nickel ion, cobalt ion, or copper ion) and/or chelator (such as sodium citrate, EDTA, or a phosphonate) (para. 0032, 0033, 0040-0043, & 0079).
Thus, at the time of the effective filing date it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an ionic crosslinking modification as taught by Sabin et al. and Gu et al. to the starch polysaccharide gelling component of Suzuki et al. in order to improve the shear resistance, heat resistance, and/or acid/alkali resistance of the starch polysaccharide gelling component via a routine crosslinking modification of the cold storage material with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 1-8, 10, 16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muffett et al. (US 5,976,400 A).
As to claims 1 and 3, Muffett et al. teach a phase change material comprising an organic alcohol, a salt, and water (abstract). The organic alcohol comprises ethanol, glycerol, isopropyl alcohol, lactitol, maltitol, mannitol, propylene glycol, or sorbitol (col. 2 lines 61-64). Glycerol, lactitol, maltitol, mannitol, and sorbitol are phase change material sugar alcohols but the remaining species are not. Muffett et al. further teach the phase change material composition may further include a thickener such as guar gum to provide the composition with an increased viscosity (col. 3 lines 10-12). Guar gum is a polysaccharide.
While the reference fails to fairly meet the claimed limitations of a composition -at-once comprising a phase change material complexed, i.e., mixed, with a polysaccharide under the meaning of anticipation, the cited teachings of the reference nevertheless meet the claimed limitations under a prima facie case of obvious. At the time of the effective filing date it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide any of glycerol, lactitol, maltitol, mannitol, and sorbitol, i.e., sugar alcohols, as the organic alcohol component and further provide a guar gum polysaccharide thickener in order to obtain a phase change material composition with an increased/tailored viscosity with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 2, guar gum reads on, at least, the polysaccharide being selected from storage and/or structural polysaccharides derived from plants.
As to claim 4, Muffett et al. further teach provision of a preservative component that reads on the claimed ionic agent/salt comprising an alkali metal salt of an organic acid. The preservative is preferably potassium sorbate or sodium benzoate (col. 3 lines 18-22) which are both alkali metal salts of an organic acid.
As to claim 5, Muffett et al. further teach the composition is capable of melting as well as changing from a liquid to a solid (col. 2 lines 49-51 and col. 4 lines 64-66+). The purpose of the composition is for a product to remain at a fixed temperature while the phase change material absorbs heat and melts instead of heat being transferred to the product (col. 2 lines 40-48). Muffett et al.’s solid/liquid phase change material composition reads on the limitation that the composition is capable of discharging heat upon crystallization of the composition. Muffett et al. further teach and/or it would flow naturally the composition has a homogenous and uniform structure (the phase change material is preferably prepared by first dissolving a selected amount of salt in water and then dissolving a selected amount of organic alcohol in water to make the phase change material, and, if desired, thickeners or preservatives are then mixed into the phase change material, col. 3 lines 54-58).
As to claim 6, Muffett et al.’s composition meets the claimed broad limitations that the composition is arranged to be charged with heat at a constant melting temperature so as to form a thermally and structurally resilient physical soft matter having a homogenous and uniform structure without leakage of the phase change material (the composition’s components are uniformly mixed and dispersed/dissolved and is capable of reversibly freezing and melting at a certain temperature, Id.; the composition may also be sealed inside a package/pouch, col. 4, which would certainly prevent the composition from leakage).
As to claim 7, Muffett et al. teach the sugar alcohol comprises mannitol, glycerol, or sorbitol (Id.).
As to claim 8, Muffett et al. teach the polysaccharide is guar gum (Id.).
As to claim 10, it is noted the application’s specification indicates the ionic cross-linking is imparted by the mere provision of di/multivalent cations including alkaline earth or transition metals, and/or salts of an acid. Provision of Muffett et al.’s preservative component reads on the limitation that the composition is ionically cross-linked as the disclosed preservative are salts of an acid substantially the same as those disclosed. The preservative is preferably potassium sorbate or sodium benzoate (col. 3 lines 18-22), which are salts of an acid.
As to claim 20, Muffett et al. further teach provision of a preservative component that reads on the claimed alkali metal ionic agent. The preservative is preferably potassium sorbate or sodium benzoate (col. 3 lines 18-22) which both contain an alkali metal.
As to claim 16, Muffett et al. teach a phase change material comprising an organic alcohol, a salt, and water (abstract). The recitation of a phase change bio-complex merely amounts to a phase change composition. The organic alcohol comprises ethanol, glycerol, isopropyl alcohol, lactitol, maltitol, mannitol, propylene glycol, or sorbitol (col. 2 lines 61-64). Glycerol, lactitol, maltitol, mannitol, and sorbitol are phase change material sugar alcohols but the remaining species are not. Muffett et al. further teach the phase change material composition may further include a thickener such as guar gum to provide the composition with an increased viscosity (col. 3 lines 10-12). Guar gum is a structural and/or storage polysaccharide.
While the reference fails to fairly meet the claimed limitations of a composition at-once comprising a polysaccharide complexed, i.e., mixed with a phase change material under the meaning of anticipation, the cited teachings of the reference nevertheless meet the claimed limitations under a prima facie case of obvious. At the time of the effective filing date it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide any of glycerol, lactitol, maltitol, mannitol, and sorbitol, i.e., sugar alcohols, as the organic alcohol component and further provide a guar gum polysaccharide thickener in order to obtain a phase change material composition with an increased/tailored viscosity with a reasonable expectation of success.
Any remaining limitations in the claim are optional. However, Muffett et al. further teach provision of a preservative component that reads on the claimed optional ionic cross linker derived from di/multivalent cations and/or acid salts. The preservative is preferably potassium sorbate or sodium benzoate (col. 3 lines 18-22) which are both salts of an acid. The disclosed preservatives could also very arguably be “derived from” (i.e., chemically synthesized) from a di/multivalent cation starting with a different di/multivalent cation of the sorbate/benzoate and performing ion exchange.
As to claim 18, Muffett et al. further teach the composition is capable of melting as well as changing from a liquid to a solid (col. 2 lines 49-51 and col. 4 lines 64-66+), which, along with the fact/rationale that the composition may contain a polysaccharide thickener (Id.), reads on the claimed forms of a liquid or gel depending on the temperature the composition is present at.
The remaining references listed on Forms 892 and 1449 have been reviewed by the examiner and are considered to be cumulative to or less material than the prior art references relied upon or described above.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW R DIAZ whose telephone number is 571-270-0324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00a-5:00p EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 https://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached on 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.
/MATTHEW R DIAZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/M.R.D./
January 21, 2026