DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 30, 2026 has been entered.
Summary
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant’s arguments and claim amendments submitted on March 30, 2026 have been entered into the file. Currently claims 1, 8, and 10 are amended, claims 5-7 and 14-15 are canceled, claims 10-13 are withdrawn, and claim 23 is new, resulting in claims 1-4, 8-9, and 16-23 pending for examination.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8-9, and 16-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghiladi (US 2019/0133132)1,2 in view of Michielsen (US 2007/0238660)1,2.
With respect to claims 1, 8-9, and 23, Ghiladi teaches photodynamic compositions that can contain a natural polymer scaffold and a photosensitizer, wherein the photosensitizer can be attached to the natural polymer scaffold (paragraph [0003]). The natural polymer scaffold may include cellulose fibers (paragraph [0003]). TMPyP-Zn is listed as a suitable photosensitizer (paragraph [0058]) and is used in Example 3 (paragraph [0108]; Fig. 5B). The photodynamic compositions can be antimicrobial (paragraph [0003]). The term “photosensitizer” refers to a molecule, compound, or composition that can produce chemical, biochemical, and/or physical change in response to being stimulated with light (paragraph [0023]). The structure can be a textile (paragraph [0004]).
Ghiladi is silent as to the textile being a woven or non-woven textile used in an article of clothing such as protective clothing, workwear, or cleanroom clothing.
Michielsen teaches an effective amount of a composition of a dye attached onto a substrate (paragraph [0012]). The dyes have the ability to absorb light in a predetermined spectrum and intensity range to produce singlet oxygen in the presence of an oxygen containing atmosphere in an amount effective to inactivate viruses (paragraph [0012]). Substrate includes fabrics such as nonwoven fabrics (paragraph [0019]). The invention may be used in masks (protective clothing/cleanroom clothing) and military uniforms (protective clothing/workwear) (paragraphs [0088]-[0107]).
Since both Ghiladi and Michielsen teach textiles treated with photosensitive compounds that produce singlet oxygen when exposed to light to provide an antimicrobial effect, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treated textile of Ghiladi to be used as a nonwoven fabric and in masks and military uniforms in order to provide antimicrobial protection to the user and because it is known in the art that textiles treated with photosensitive compounds are suitable for use in nonwovens and as masks and military uniforms.
With respect to claim 2, Ghiladi teaches al the limitations of claim 1 above. Ghiladi further teaches the compositions can be a coating on the surface of the material (paragraphs [0003]-[0004]). Ghiladi further describes TMPyP-ZN as a positively charged photosensitizer (paragraph [0058]), and that natural polymer scaffold can be surface modified to be anionic and/or contain more negatively charged reactive groups to have increased and/or strengthened electrostatic interaction between with a cationic photosensitizer (paragraph [0055]). Therefore, the TMPyP-Zn is adsorbed.
With respect to claims 3 and 22, Ghiladi teaches al the limitations of claim 1 above. Ghiladi further teaches the photosensitizer may be attached to the natural polymer scaffold by a covalent bond (paragraph [0003]).
With respect to claims 3 and 19-21, Ghiladi teaches al the limitations of claim 19 above. Ghiladi further teaches that TMPyP-ZN is a positively charged photosensitizer (paragraph [0058]), and the natural polymer scaffold can be surface modified to be anionic and/or contain more negatively charged reactive groups to have increased and/or strengthened electrostatic (ionic) interaction between with a cationic photosensitizer (paragraph [0055]).
With respect to claim 4, Ghiladi teaches al the limitations of claim 1 above. Ghiladi further teaches that TMPyP-ZN is a positively charged photosensitizer (paragraph [0058]), and the natural polymer scaffold can be surface modified to be anionic and/or contain more negatively charged reactive groups to have increased and/or strengthened electrostatic interaction between with a cationic photosensitizer (paragraph [0055]).
With respect to claim 16, Ghiladi teaches al the limitations of claim 1 above. The photodynamic compositions can be formulated as a surface coating (paragraph [0048]).
With respect to claims 17-18, Ghiladi teaches al the limitations of claim 16 above. Ghiladi further teaches and example where nanofibrillated cellulose is embedded with a photosensitizer and used as a coating (paragraph [0090]). The photosensitizer may be attached to nanofibrillated cellulose by a covalent bond or a non-covalent bond such as electrostatic interaction (ionic) (paragraph [0003]).
Response to Arguments
Response – Claim Rejections 35 USC §103
Applicant’s arguments filed March 30, 2026 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
On pages 7-8 and 10-11 of the response Applicant submits that when starting from Ghiladi the skilled person would not arrive at the claimed solution as Ghiladi is directed to polymer scaffold systems with incorporation of the photosensitizer in a polymer matrix and does not provide any teaching or suggestion to bind the photosensitizer directly to fibers of a woven or non-woven textile fabric.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the dye bonds directly to the fiber) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In independent claims only require the dye be bonded to the fibers, it does not require the dye be directly bonded as alleged. Through the use of a matrix, the photosensitizer of Ghiladi is bonded to the fibers in the form of a coating. It is noted that the instant specification at paragraph [0053] also identifies use of a polymer matrix as a method of binding the dye to the fibers through a coating, and claims 16-18 require the dye be bonded to and/or in a coating.
However, it is further noted that Ghiladi is not limited to indirectly bonding the TMPyP through use of a matrix. Ghiladi further describes TMPyP-ZN as a positively charged photosensitizer (Ghiladi; paragraph [0058]), and that natural polymer scaffold can be surface modified to be anionic and/or contain more negatively charged reactive groups to have increased and/or strengthened electrostatic interaction between with a cationic photosensitizer (Ghiladi; paragraph [0055]). Ghiladi also teaches the photosensitizer may be attached to the natural polymer scaffold by a covalent bond (Ghiladi; paragraph [0003]). Therefore in addition to teaching indirect bonding of the photosensitizer Ghiladi also teaches direct bonding of the photosensitizer.
On pages 9 and 12 of the response Applicant submits that Michielsen does not disclose or suggest to use TMPyP, thus the modification as suggested in the Office Action would not be recognized by the skilled person and would require a deliberate and non-trivial redesign rather than adaptation or substitution.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In the instant case, Michielsen was not relied on to teach the TMPyP dye, Ghiladi was as described in the rejections above. Similar to Ghiladi, Michielsen teaches photosensitive compounds that produce singlet oxygen when exposed to light to provide an antimicrobial effect (Michielsen; paragraphs [0012], [0019]). The materials of Michielsen are used in masks in military uniforms (Michielsen; paragraphs [0088]-[0107]). Therefore, Michielsen was relied on to show typical uses for textiles treated with photosensitizers. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treated fibers of Ghiladi to be a nonwoven fabric used in masks and military uniforms in order to provide antimicrobial properties to the user and because it is known in the art that textiles treated with photosensitive compounds are suitable for use in nonwovens and as masks and military uniforms.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Larissa Rowe Emrich whose telephone number is (571)272-2506. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30am - 4:00pm EST.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
LARISSA ROWE EMRICH
Examiner
Art Unit 1789
/LARISSA ROWE EMRICH/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
1 Cited in IDS
2 Previously presented
Prosecution Insights