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 .
Status of Claims
Preliminary amendment filed on 10/24/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1 and 9 are amended. Claims 4 and 15 are cancelled.
Claims 1-3, 5-14, and 16-20 are pending and being examined on merits herein.
Priority
The instant application 18026224, filed on 03/14/2023, is a 371 of PCT/JP2021033773, filed on 09/14/2021, claims for foreign priority to Japan 2020157483, filed on 09/18/2020, and also claims for foreign priority to Japan 2021049047, filed on 03/23/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), filed on 09/22/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Withdrawn Rejections
All previous claim Objection(s) / Rejection(s) as set forth in the previous Office action (mailed 6/27/2025) that are not repeated and/or maintained in the instant Office action are withdrawn, in light of applicant’s amendment filed on 10/24/2025.
Claim interpretation
Claim 1 is interpreted as an antiviral article comprising a cured product layer. The cure product layer comprises a cured product of a curable resin composition and antiviral particles. The antiviral particles contain antiviral particles A being particles containing a styrene resin.
Claim 9 is interpreted as an antiviral resin composition comprising a curable resin composition and antiviral particles. The antiviral particles contain antiviral particles A being particles containing a styrene resin.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-3, 5-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shuchi et al. (JP2013193966, 09/30/2013, IDS of 03/14/2023) in view of Asai et al. (JP3782848, 06/07/2006, Machine Translation attached is relied upon for the below rejection; PTO-892).
Shuchi throughout the reference discloses an antiviral resin composition containing a virus infection inhibiting agent and a synthetic resin and, accordingly, capable of easily producing an antiviral molded article (e.g., Abstract).
Regarding instant claims 1 and 9, Shuchi teaches the resin composition contains a virus inhibitor containing a virus inhibiting compound and a synthetic resin (e.g., Claim 1), the synthetic resin in the composition is a curable resin (e.g., Claim 2). Shuchi indicates that the antiviral material can be a polymer having styrene sulfonic acid or a salt thereof as a monomer component (e.g., [0012]-[0014]); or copolymer containing a monomer having a hydrophobic property, preferably as styrene, when the resin composition is used as a coating material ([0016]-[0017]), e.g., styrenesulfonic acid hydrochloric-styrene copolymer, a styrenesulfonic acid-styrene copolymer, a styrenesulfonic acid hydrochloric-styrene-sulfonic acid-styrene copolymer (e.g., Claim 7; [0018]). Shuchi also indicates that synthetic resin particles can be used as a carrier for including a virus-blocking compound (e.g., [0075]), resulting in antiviral particles containing resin. Shuchi indicates the molded article comprising the resin composition and antiviral resin particles can be in any desired form of the cured synthetic resin, e.g., resin thin layer [0061] (e.g., [0061]- [0062]; [0057]; Claim 14).
Thus, Shuchi teaches an antiviral article comprising a cured product layer; the cured product layer comprises a cured product of a curable resin composition and antiviral particles; the antiviral particles contain antiviral particles A being particles containing a styrene sulfonic acid, salt, or copolymer resin, corresponding to the interpreted claim 1 as presented above.
In conclusion, Shuchi also teaches an antiviral resin composition comprising a curable resin composition and antiviral particles; the antiviral particles contain antiviral particles A being particles containing a styrene sulfonic acid, salt, or copolymer resin, corresponding to the interpreted claim 9 as presented above.
Regarding instant claim 2, Shuchi presents in table 1, the antiviral particles PSS 100, PSS50, PSS 30, or acrylic resin particles in the resin composition contain amounts of 5, 10, 30, or 10 parts respectively in total 100 parts of the article/composition, overlapping with amount of 0.5 to 20.0 parts by mass per 100 parts in instant claim.
Regarding instant claims 3 and 14, Shuchi indicates that the resin composition capable of easily producing a molded article can easily impart a desirable base material with virus infection inhibiting effect, largely inhibiting infection of virus to human caused by the base material (e.g., Abstract), by a method of laminating and integrating a resin layer comprising the resin composition on a substrate surface (e.g., [0058]), as a base material, not limited to flooring, siding, tablecloth, etc. (e.g., [0059]).
Regarding instant claims 5, 10 and 16, Shuchi further teaches the thermosetting resin include a phenol resin and others [0034], and photopolymerization initiator for an active energy ray-curable resin can use phenyl ether derivative compounds such as, benzoin methyl ether, benzoin ethyl ether, benzoin isopropyl ether, benzoin-n-butyl ether, benzoin isobutyl ether [0035].
Regarding instant claims 6, 11, 17 and 20, Shuchi indicates that the resin composition may optionally contain additives such as stabilizers, colorants, plasticizers, fillers, matting agents, foaming agents, flame retardants, lubricants, antistatic agents, antioxidants, ultraviolet absorbers, light stabilizers, moisture absorbers, antifungal agents, antibacterial agents, antiallergenic agents, and allergen soothing agents [0045].
Regarding instant claims 7-8, 12-13, and 18-19, Shuchi describes preparation of virus-blocking compound powder, with average particle sizes of PSS 100, PSS 50, and PSS 30 representing 19 um, 18 um, and 22 um respectively [0088]. Shuchi exhibits the testing results of resin product articles /compositions with both virus-blocking particles and acrylic resin particles in examples 7-10 (Table 1), compared to the comparative examples 1-3 that does not contain viral blocking particles, the virus infection reduction rate is > 99 % of the product containing both particles compared to the comparative examples with no viral inhibiting particles. The testing example 8 contains both viral blocking particle PSS 50 (diameters 18 um) and acrylic resin particles A with particle diameters of 18.5 um, while examples 7, and 9-10 contain viral block particles PSS 50 with diameters of 18 um, and acrylic resin particles B with average diameters of 34 to 42 um [0088-0089; 0091]. Therefore, Shuchi teaches the antiviral particles in the antiviral article or antiviral resin composition contain two different sized particles with antiviral activities, corresponding to instant claims.
Shuchi does not teach the resin in the antiviral particles is styrene resin as recited in instant claims 1 and 9.
Asai throughout the reference teaches an antimicrobial molded article comprising antibacterial compound iodine and polymer or elastomer (e.g., [0010]).
Asai teaches that low-melting point resins such as styrene-based resins can be used alone or in combination with others (e.g., [0064]); styrene resins such as polystyrene and many other styrene copolymers is suitable for the antibacterial thermoplastic polymer molded article (e.g., [0073-0074]). Asai indicates that the product can be a sheet, e.g., a porous resin sheet, comprising at least one layer in which the particles capable of antibacterial effect (e.g., [0081]).
It would have been prima facie obvious for one person with ordinary skills in the art to swap styrene derivative or styrene copolymers from Shuchi with the styrene resin from Asai to arrive at current invention. Because both references teach the similar antimicrobial articles using polymers for the antimicrobial composition, and Shuchi already teaches resins of styrene derivatives and styrene-containing copolymers are suitable ingredients for the composition, swapping the resin with a similar alternative would be convenient, especially using styrene resin itself is demonstrated by Asai as suitable polymer for the article. Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results renders obviousness. See The Supreme Court in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP §2144.05(I) states that “A prima facie case of obviousness typically exists when the ranges of a claimed composition overlap the ranges disclosed in the prior art.” See In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2003). For this instance, the antiviral particles A amount overlaps with those in prior art. Furthermore, “[i]t would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize additive amount through nothing more than “routine experimentation,” because of a reasonable expectation of success resulting from the optimization for desirable features of intended use of the composition (MPEP §2144.05 (II)). See Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382; In re Hoeschele, 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969).
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant’s remarks/arguments filed on 10/24/2025 have been fully considered. They are moot because of the new ground of rejections presented above.
Please refer to entire office action as a complete response to the remarks/arguments.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONGXIU ZHANG SPIERING whose telephone number is (703)756-4796. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-5:00pm (Except for Fridays).
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, SUE X. LIU can be reached at (571)272-5539. 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.
/DX.Z./Examiner, Art Unit 1616
/SUE X LIU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1616