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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Proviso 2 in claim 13 requires the mass of the crosslinking agent and the mass of the initiator to be per the total mass of the bromobutane, the vinylimidazole and the acrylonitrile; however, the ionic liquid monomers in claim 10 are not require the ionic liquid monomers to be bromobutane, vinylimidazole or acrylonitrile. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 14 sets forth adding “the acrylonitrile” to “the bromobutane” and “the vinylimidazole” to obtain the form-filming liquid; however, the ionic liquid monomers are not required to comprise acrylonitrile; bromobutane or vinylimidazole. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al (CN111808916, wherein US2023/0265482 is used as the English language equivalent).
Zhang sets forth trypsin detection films and preparation methods for preparing said detection films which appear to anticipate applicants claimed method.
Said trypsin detection film can be a polyionic liquid type film, which has the excellent performances of an ionic liquid and a polymer, can overcome the fluidity of the ionic liquid, has unique physical and chemical properties—see [0059].
Regarding claims 1 and 16: Zhang sets forth said polymer film substrate (corresponding to applicant’s polyionic film) is prepared by the following steps: providing a base plate assembly comprising a base plate (corresponding to applicant’s substrate) and a first lubricant disposed on the base plate; placing a film-forming solution (corresponding to applicants film-forming liquid) on the base plate assembly, and putting a cover plate with a second lubricant on the film-forming solution, where the film-forming solution is in contact with the first lubricant and the second lubricant, respectively; and separating the polymer film substrate (corresponding to the polyionic film) from the base plate assembly and the cover plate after a polymerization reaction of various raw materials in the film-forming solution to obtain the polymer film. The polymer film substrate obtained in the separating step is then cleaned –see [0081]- [0084] and [0124]. This is deemed to anticipate claim 1 and the obtained polymer film substrate are deemed to anticipate claim 16 (see explanation regarding claim 4 below for ionic).
Regarding claims 3 and 5: Zhang teaches said first lubricant or second lubricant is inert to ultraviolet light and does not interfere with ultraviolet light. Said first lubricant and said second lubricant are selected from at least one of white petrolatum, silicone oil, paraffin, mineral oil, or grease. Zhang explicitly teaches the first lubricant may be white vaseline, silicone oil, mineral oil, and the second lubricant may be white vaseline, silicone oil, grease, etc.—see [0091] – [0092]. This teaching satisfies/anticipates the second proviso in claim 5 and both provisos of claim 3. Regarding claim 4: Zhang teaches the film-forming solution may be one or more of the imidazole ionic liquid, the pyridine ionic liquid, the quaternary ammonium salt ionic liquid, the quaternary phosphine ionic liquid or the pyrrolidine ionic liquid, preferably the ionic liquid monomer comprises bromobutane and vinylimidazole—see [0102] – [103]. This satisfies/anticipates the first proviso in claim 4.
Regarding claim 5: Said cover plate may be a transparent glass plate or a transparent hard plastic plate. The transparent glass plate or the transparent hard plastic plate is used for enabling the polymerization reaction to be carried out under the irradiation of ultraviolet light, so that the reaction speed is accelerated, and an optional method is provided for carrying out the polymerization reaction—see [0090]. This teachings sets forth with sufficient specificity, in such as manner, a skilled artisan would understand the cover plate is resistant to ultraviolet radiation. This satisfies/anticipates the first proviso in claim 5.
Regarding claim 6: Said polymerization reaction is carried out under the irradiation of ultraviolet light, wherein the wavelength of the ultraviolet light is preferably 250-400 nm and the irradiation time of ultraviolet light is 10-30 min—see [0113] – [0015]. This anticipates/satisfies claim 6.
Regarding claim 7: Zhang additionally teaches: the polymerization reaction may be carried out under heating while being carried out under irradiation of ultraviolet light. Where, the heating temperature may be 20-60° C.—see [0116]. This satisfies/anticipates proviso 1 in claim 7.
Additionally, Zhang sets forth said polymerization reaction may be initiated by an initiator, wherein said initiator may be photoinitiator 907, photoinitiator 184, azobisisobutyronitrile, benzoin and derivatives thereof—see [0018]. Zhang, additionally sets forth said initiator preferably comprises diphenyl(2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl)phosphine oxide—see [0106]. This satisfies/anticipates proviso 2 off claim 7.
Regarding claim 8: Zhang teaches after separating the polymer film substrate from the base plate assembly and the cover plate, the method further comprises the step of cleaning the polymer film substrate, comprising ultrasonic cleaning in clear water, an alcohol solution and clear water in sequence—see [0024]. Additionally, Zhang teaches removing the base plate assembly, placing the cover plate attached with the polymer film substrate in a standing solution, standing for 10-30 min, and removing the cover plate to obtain the polymer film substrate; or, removing the cover plate, placing the base plate assembly attached with the polymer film substrate in the standing solution, standing for 10-30 min, and removing the base plate assembly to obtain the polymer film substrate—see [0119] – [0120]. Thus, both proviso of claim 8 are anticipated/satisfied.
Regarding claim 9: Zhang sets forth said preparation method may further comprise a step where the base plate is wetted with a wetting solution before the tinfoil is laid on the base plate, wherein the wetting solution is preferably water, ethyl alcohol, or a mixed solution thereof—see [0095]. Thus, claim 9 is anticipated/satisfied.
Regarding claims 10-11: Zhang teaches the steps of preparing the film-forming solution comprises the preparation method for the film-forming solution comprises: uniformly mixing an ionic liquid monomer and a base film monomer, adding a cross-linking agent and an initiator, and carrying out a second ultrasonic treatment to obtain the film-forming solution for 10-30 min, wherein the uniformly mixing the ionic liquid monomer and bas film monomer comprises performing a first ultrasonic treatment on the ionic liquid monomer, where the first ultrasonic treatment lasts for 10-30 min—see [0025] – [0028]. This satisfies/anticipates claims 10-11.
Regarding claim 12: Zhang teaches the ionic liquid monomers comprise a mixture of bromobutane and vinylimidazole in a molar molar ratio of is 2:1 to 1:1, respectively and said base film monomer comprises acrylonitrile, wherein the mass of the acrylonitrile is greater than or equal to the sum of the mass of the bromobutane and the vinylimidazole—see [0030]- [0031]. This is deemed to satisfies/anticipates all provisos in claim 12.
Regarding claim 13: Zhang teaches said cross-linking agent comprises N,
N′-methylenebisacrylamide, in a mass percent of 8 wt. %-12 wt. % based on the total mass of the bromobutane, the vinylimidazole and the acrylonitrile and the initiator comprises
diphenyl(2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl) phosphine oxide in a mass percent of 1 wt. %-4 wt. % based on the total mass of the bromobutane, the vinylimidazole and the acrylonitrile—see [0032] – [0033]. This anticipates/satisfies claim 13.
Regarding claim 14: Zhang explicitly teaches an embodiment where the preparation of the film-forming solution includes the steps: mixing the bromobutane and the vinylimidazole in equal molar ratio, and carrying out an ultrasonic treatment on the obtained mixed solution for 15 min until the two are fully mixed; adding an amount of the acrylonitrile equal to the total mass of the bromobutane and the vinylimidazole after removing impurities; then, adding N,N-methylenebisacrylamide in an amount of 8 wt. % based on the total mass of the bromobutane, the vinylimidazole and the acrylonitrile and 2,4,6-diphenyl(trimethylbenzoyl)phosphine oxide in an amount of 1 wt. % based on by the total mass of the bromobutane, the vinylimidazole and the acrylonitrile, and after said addition, carrying out an ultrasonic treatment for 15 min to obtain a film-forming solution—see [0108]-[0110].
Regarding claim 15: Zhang explicitly teaches immersing the obtained polymer film substrate in a dye solution comprising water and/or an alcoholic solvent, such as ethyl alcohol—see [0055]; [0078], and [0012]. Zhang explicitly teaches a dye solution comprising 2 mg/mL of a dye in a solvent comprising an 80% ethyl alcohol, i.e., a ratio of 1:4 water/ethyl alcohol—see [0167]. Thus, provisos 2-3 in claim 15 is satisfied/anticipated, wherein 2 mg/mL is encompassed in the claim 0.5 – 8 mg/mL range in proviso 3.
Regarding claim 17: Zhang sets forth the obtained polymer film is used for/in trypsin detection film kits, wherein the trypsin detection kit further comprises a standard colorimetric card for trypsin detection—see [0002], [0005], and [0039].
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (cited above) in view of Ameloot (WO2021176043, effective filing date 3/06/2020).
Zhang is set forth above as anticipating the instantly claimed method of claims 1 and 3-18. Zhang does not expressly set forth the base plate (substrate) is a silicon wafer with a pattern surface; or a silicon wafer comprising a concave groove; the surface of said wafer comprises protruding cylinders or the surface of said wafer is provided with circular holes penetrating through the sheet as found in claim 2. Zhang teaches the base plate may be a glass plate, a stainless steel plate, a hard plastic plate through which ultraviolet light does not easily pass, etc., wherein it is preferable that the base plate is a glass plate—see [0089]. However, it is known in the art that polyvinyl imidazole ionic films are known to be coated onto patterned silicon wafers, as set forth by Ameloot. Ameloot sets forth 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium bromide polyionic films containing 1- methylimidazole, wherein said films can be coated onto patterned silicon wafers—see example 1 on page 12, lines 10-15. Zhang and Ameloot are analogous art since they are from the same field of invention, that is the art of preparing polyionic films comprising vinylimidazole. Therefore, it would have been with in the skill level of an ordinary artisan to coat the polyionic film of Zhang on to a known substrate, such as a patterned silicon wafer, as taught by Ameloot with an expectation of successfully obtaining a patterned detection kit in absence of evidence to the contrary and/or unexpected results. Thus, it is deemed a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success—see DyStar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick Co., 464 F.3d 1356, 1360, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1645 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 11,771,311 to Duan et al, which is a family member of CN 111808916), sets forth a polymer film forming substrate obtained by the same steps and same composition as instantly claimed—see figure 36 and col. 31, line 55 to col. 33, line 53.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANZA L MCCLENDON whose telephone number is (571)272-1074. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, Heidi Riviere-Kelley can be reached at 571-270-1831. 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.
/SANZA L. McCLENDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
SMc