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 U.S.C. § 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2021/096230 A1 (herein “Yun”) in view of WO 00/69264 A1 (herein “Ottersbach”). US 2022/0346379 A1 is referred to herein as a translation of Yun. A computer-generated English translation of Ottersbach is referred to herein.
As to claims 1-5: Yun describes superabsorbent polymers (see the abstract). The polymers include units of monomers commonly used in superabsorbent polymers (see ¶ [0057]), more preferably acrylic acid that is partly neutralized (see ¶ [0059]). The polymers further include units of an internal crosslinking agent (see ¶¶ [0060]-[0063]). The polymers further include units of an antimicrobial monomer comprising a guanidine moiety (see ¶¶ [0039]-[0047]). The polymer is surface-treated by a surface crosslinking agent (see ¶¶ [0095]-[0101]).
Yun does not disclose a monomer according to the presently recited chemical formula.
Ottersbach describes inherently microbicidal and antimicrobial macromolecules (see p. 1 and the top of p. 3 of the translation). The polymers include units of nitrogen-containing monomers such as tertbutylaminoethyl methacrylate and at least one further vinyl monomer such as acrylic acid, among others (see the second paragraph of p. 4 of the translation).
Case law has established that it is prima facie obvious to substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007). MPEP 2143, rationale (B).
In the present case, Yun describes a polymer which differs from the presently claimed polymer by the substitution of the guanidine-containing monomers with a monomer of the present chemical formula. The substituted component (monomers according to the present chemical formula), such as tertbutylaminoethyl methacrylate, and its antimicrobial function were known in the art, as evidenced by the discussion above regarding Ottersbach. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted tertbutylaminoethyl methacrylate for all or part of the guanidine-containing monomers of Yun’s polymer, and the results of the substitution (an alternative antimicrobial polymer) would have been predictable.
In light of this discussion, it is apparent that the presently claimed invention is arrived at by simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the present invention to have substituted tertbutylaminoethyl methacrylate for all or part the guanidine-containing monomers of Yun’s polymer, thereby arriving at the presently claimed invention.
As to claim 6: Yun further discloses that the antimicrobial monomer is used in an amount of 0.01 to 10 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of water-soluble ethylene-based unsaturated monomer (see ¶ [0049]). This range of amounts overlaps the presently recited range of amounts. Case law has established that a prima facie case of obviousness is established where the claimed ranges overlap the ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05.
As to claims 7-8: Because the polymer suggested by the combination of Yun and Ottersbach would contain the same repeating units as does the present polymer, there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the polymer suggested by the combination of Yun and Ottersbach would have the same properties as the present polymer, including the presently recited antibacterial property against gram-negative bacteria.
As to claim 9: Yun further discloses that the CRC of the polymer is 29 g/g or more, or 30 g/g or more, and 50 g/g or less, or 40 g/g or less (see ¶ [0108]). Additionally, because the polymer suggested by the combination of Yun and Ottersbach would contain the same repeating units as does the present polymer, there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the polymer suggested by the combination of Yun and Ottersbach would have the same properties as the present polymer, including the presently recited CRC.
As to claim 12: Yun further discloses that the polymer is used for hygiene products (see ¶ [0020]).
As to claim 13: Yun further discloses that the polymer is classified into polymers having a particle size of about 150 μm to about 850 μm (see ¶ [0091]).
As to claim 10: Yun describes superabsorbent polymers (see the abstract). The polymers are made by polymerizing monomers commonly used in superabsorbent polymers (see ¶ [0057]), more preferably acrylic acid that is partly neutralized (see ¶ [0059]); an internal crosslinking agent (see ¶¶ [0060]-[0063]); and an antimicrobial monomer comprising a guanidine moiety (see ¶¶ [0039]-[0047]). The polymerization is performed in the presence of an initiator (see ¶ [0055]) and forms a hydrogel polymer (see ¶ [0017]).
The hydrogel is subjected to drying, pulverizing, and classifying to form a base polymer powder (see ¶ [0018]). The base polymer powder is subjected to crosslinking by heat treatment in the presence of a surface crosslinking agent (see ¶¶ [0019] and [0095]-[0101]).
Yun does not disclose a monomer according to the presently recited chemical formula.
Ottersbach describes inherently microbicidal and antimicrobial macromolecules (see p. 1 and the top of p. 3 of the translation). The polymers include units of nitrogen-containing monomers such as tertbutylaminoethyl methacrylate and at least one further vinyl monomer such as acrylic acid, among others (see the second paragraph of p. 4 of the translation).
Case law has established that it is prima facie obvious to substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007). MPEP 2143, rationale (B).
In the present case, Yun describes a polymer which differs from the presently claimed polymer by the substitution of the guanidine-containing monomers with a monomer of the present chemical formula. The substituted component (monomers according to the present chemical formula), such as tertbutylaminoethyl methacrylate, and its antimicrobial function were known in the art, as evidenced by the discussion above regarding Ottersbach. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted tertbutylaminoethyl methacrylate for all or part of the guanidine-containing monomers of Yun’s polymer, and the results of the substitution (an alternative antimicrobial polymer) would have been predictable.
In light of this discussion, it is apparent that the presently claimed invention is arrived at by simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the present invention to have substituted tertbutylaminoethyl methacrylate for all or part the guanidine-containing monomers of Yun’s polymer, thereby arriving at the presently claimed invention.
As to claim 11: Yun further discloses that the antimicrobial monomer is used in an amount of 0.01 to 10 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of water-soluble ethylene-based unsaturated monomer (see ¶ [0049]). This range of amounts overlaps the presently recited range of amounts. Case law has established that a prima facie case of obviousness is established where the claimed ranges overlap the ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05.
As to claim 14: Yun further discloses that the internal crosslinking agent may be included in an amount of 0.01 to 1 part by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the water-soluble ethylene-based unsaturated monomer (see ¶ [0063]). Yun further discloses that the surface crosslinking agent may be introduced in an amount of 0.001 part by weight to 5 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the base polymer powder (see ¶ [0102]).
The hydrogel polymer may have a water content of 40% by weight to 80% by weight with respect to the total weight of the hydrogel polymer (see ¶ [0079]), and the water content of the dried polymer may be about 5% by weight to about 10% by weight (see ¶ [0087]).
The surface crosslinking agent is thus used in an amount of about 0.00067 to 1.053% by weight with respect to the total weight of the hydrogel polymer. This range of amounts overlaps the presently recited range of amounts. Case law has established that a prima facie case of obviousness is established where the claimed ranges overlap the ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05.
As to claim 15: Yun further discloses that the hydrogel polymer may have a water content of 40% by weight to 80% by weight with respect to the total weight of the hydrogel polymer (see ¶ [0079]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD A. HUHN whose telephone number is (571)270-7345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9 AM to 6 PM 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, Arrie (Lanee) Reuther can be reached at (571) 270-7026. 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.
/RICHARD A. HUHN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764