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. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 11/4/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that traverse on the ground that it would not constitute a burden on the Patent Office to examiner at least Groups I, II, and IV in the same application. This is not found persuasive because t he groups of inventions do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features , as set forth in the Requirement for Restriction mailed 9/4/2025 . See MPEP 823, t he analysis used to determine whether the Office may require restriction differs in national stage applications submitted under 35 U.S.C. 371 (unity of invention analysis) as compared to national applications filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) (independent and distinct analysis). It is respectfully submitted that, upon identification of an allowable product/apparatus claim, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of an allowed product/apparatus claim will be considered for rejoinder. Claims 65-79 are pending, of which claims 74-79 are withdrawn from consideration at this time as being directed to a non-elected invention. Claims 65-73 encompass the elected invention and are examined herein on the merits for patentability. 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) 65 and 66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Bergbreiter et al. ( Angew . Chem . , 2000, 112, p. 1081-1084). Bergbreiter discloses the design of functional polymers that are soluble in aqueous or fluorous phases, and that recover and remove trace metals from aqueous or organic solutions. W e prepared a fluorous phase soluble hydroxamic acid polymer (Scheme 4). When 140 ppm of 12 were dissolved in 10 mL of FC-77 (a perfluorinated ether) and then shaken with 10 mL of CH3OH containing 28 ppm of FeIII for 15 min, a red fluorous phase formed. Centrifugation and liquid/liquid separation of the fluorous phase resulted in a CH3OH phase that contained no detectable FeIII , based on the absence of a detectable absorbance on addition of 5 to this solution (>99.5% FeIII extraction). Treatment with ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) regenerates these soluble polymer complexing agents (page 1083). 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 . Claim (s) 65-69 and 73 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsien et al. (WO 17/147212). Tsien teaches non-invasive imaging methods, comprising (a) administering to a subject a cellular labelling composition comprising a compound comprising fluorine-19 (19F), wherein said compound comprising fluorine-19 ( 19 F) associates with one or more cells; and (b) detecting said association using an imaging modality, wherein said association can include cellular binding and/or cellular uptake. In some embodiments, the method is used for cytotherapy , e.g., cell-based therapy (paragraph 0011). In some embodiments, the compound comprising fluorine-19 (19F) comprises a perfluorinated compound. In certain embodiments, the compound comprising fluorine-19 (¹9F) comprises a metalated perfluorinated compound. In some embodiments, the perfluorinated compound binds and tightly retains metal ions in the fluorous phase. The metal ions can be selected from the group consisting of VO2+, Cr3 , Mn2 + , Mn 3+ , Fe3 +… 4 4 Sc3+ , 52Mn2+ , 61Cu²+ , 64Cu²+ , 66 Ga3+ , 68Ga 3+, etc. (paragraph 0013-14). In some embodiments, the perfluorinated compound is formulated as a nanoemulsion . The nanoemulsion can further comprise a perfluorocarbon (paragraph 0015). N ovel metal complexes are provided. In certain embodiments, the metal complexes are represented by formula MLx , wherein M is an element with atomic number 12, 13, or from 23 to 31, or from 38 to 50, or from 56 to 83, L is a suitable ligand bearing a fluorinated substituent Rr, and x is an integer from 1 to 10 , including general structures 1-4. Z represents O, S, Se, or NR³ X and Y, for each occurrence , independently represent (A)-H, (A)-F, (A)-OR, (A)-SR, (A)- NHR4, or (A)-NR4R5,, wherein A represents a spacer containing from 0 to 8 carbon or heteroatoms, in any combination, optionally substituted with groups R-R20, as a straight chain or branched chain, or containing one or more rings , R1-20 may for each occurrence include, hydrogen…, hydroxamic acid, etc. (paragraph 0103). In some embodiments, the perfluorocarbon compound of the compositions described herein includes or is derived from a linear perfluoropolyether (PFPE), (PFPE- OMe ), (PFPEDEA), (PFOB), and PF2G (paragraph 0106). The fluorinated diketone and/or the perfluorocarbon can be formulated as an aqueous nanoemulsion , such as an oil-in-water colloidal suspension or an oil-in-water colloidal emulsion. Such nanoemulsions can also be formulated to include additional fluorocarbons or fluorocarbon blends (e.g., a mixture of two or more different fluorocarbons). The nanoemulsions can be metalated with a transition metal ion or a lanthanide ion. In some embodiments, the composition ofthe present invention includes iron(III) tris-ẞ- diketonate and perfluoroether (paragraph 0112). In some embodiments, the nanoemulsion is prepared by microfluidization . An exemplary embodiment of method for preparing a useful emulsion is provided herein. The fluorocarbon oil blends were prepared from PFPE, PFPE-DEA ( Exfluor ), PFOB , and pAn -FDK agents. Proportions (Table 1) were prepared gravimetrically in a 15 or 50 mL conical Falcon tube. Per 1 gram of PFC blend, 0.5 mL aqueous solution of Pluronic F68 (i.e. surfactant) was added, and the mixture was vortexed at the highest speed. Water (8.5 mL) was added, followed by brief vortexing and ultrasonication (paragraph 0129). Pluronic F68-coated emulsions (such as exemplary emulsions 3-9 of Table 1) are easily metalated by a variety of d- and f-block metals in aqueous solution at optimal pH (paragraph 0130). See also paragraph 0145+ directed to emulsions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide an emulsion containing a fluorinated compound and a metal ligand complex wherein the ligand bea rs a fluorinated substituent R F , including general structures 1-4 and including a hydroxamate bearing substituent in view of Tsien. One would have been motivated to do so because Tsien teaches that m etalation of fluorinated nanoparticles or nanoemulsion can impart contrast in multiple imaging modalities. Introduction of high quantities of metals into the fluorous phase is feasible using metal-binding ligands that are soluble in the fluorous phase (page 113), and further teaches a hydroxamate to be one of a few suitable substituents for use in the fluorinated metal ligand complex (paragraph 0103). It is noted that the fluorinated emulsions contain a surfact ant and fluorocarbon. It would have been further obvious to provide a radionuclide as the metal because Tsien teaches that doing so allows for positron emission tomography imaging (paragraph 0120). Claim (s) 65-73 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsien et al. (WO 17/147212) in view of K oshti et al. ( Synthetic Commun ., 2002, 32(24), p. 3779-3790). Tsien teaches a nanoemulsion comprising a perfluorocarbon and a fluorinated metal ligand complex, as set forth above. With regard to claims 70-72, Tsien does not specifically recite wherein the fluorinated hydroxamic acid has a structure corresponding to chelator 1 or 2, including FHOA , of the instant claims . Koshti teaches that hydroxamic acids are well known to bind hard metal ions like Fe(III) or An(IV). As part of our ongoing program on the synthesis of hydroxamic acids, we have been interested in the synthesis of N-fluoroalkyl-hydroxamic acid ligands with the aim of developing chelating systems that have applications for the extraction of actinides into supercritical carbon dioxide. To our surprise, methodology to access N- fluoroalkylhydroxamates has not been documented in the literature. Some reports on the synthesis of hydroxamic acids with fluorinated acyl groups have been reported. In this paper, we report the synthesis of three new reagents and their application to prepare a variety of N- fluoroalkylhydroxamic acids, a new class of extractants. See Table 1 , showing synthesized N- fluoroalkylhydroxamic acids. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide a fluorinated hydroxamic acid corresponding to FHOA when the teaching of Tsien is taken in view of Koshti . The Supreme Court in KSR Inter national Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. ___, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness which are consistent with the proper “functional approach” to the determination of obviousness as laid down in Graham. One such rationale includes the s imple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results . The key to supporting any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is the clear articulation of the reason(s) why the claimed invention would have been obvious. See MPEP 2143. In the instant case, the substituted components , fluoroalkyl hydroxamates, and their functions were known in the art at the time of the instant invention. O ne of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known fluorinated hydroxamic acid chelator for another, and the results of the substitution would have been predictable , that is binding metal, such as iron . Conclusion No claims are allowed at this time. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT LEAH H SCHLIENTZ whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9928 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday, 8:30am - 12:30pm 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT MICHAEL HARTLEY can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-0616 . 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. /LHS/ /Michael G. Hartley/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1618