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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Information disclosure statements were filed on 04/07/2026, 05/12/2026, 05/19/2026, 06/17/2026, and 06/25/2026.
Allowable Subject Matter
Applicant is advised that the Notice of Allowance mailed 03/16/2026 is vacated. If the issue fee has already been paid, applicant may request a refund or request that the fee be credited to a deposit account. However, applicant may wait until the application is either found allowable or held abandoned. If allowed, upon receipt of a new Notice of Allowance, applicant may request that the previously submitted issue fee be applied. If abandoned, applicant may request refund or credit to a specified Deposit Account.
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 81 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. 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 81 does not further limit the claims since claim 74 already sets out that the process occurs through melt polycondensation. Correction is required.
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) 74-79, 81-85, 94-96 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krasko et al (Department of Medicinal Chemistry and Natural Products, 2003).
Regarding claims 74, 81, and 94, Kraskow et al disclose a method of a narrow disperse polyanhydride comprising a polycondensation of a dicarboxylic acid (DA) and a hydroxy-alkanoic acid (HA) in the presence of acetic anhydride (see abstract). Poly(sebacic acid)(PSA) is transesterified with ricinoleic acid (RA) (see Scheme 1). The ratio of carboxylic acid end groups to acetic anhydride is 1:1 (see page 1061, Insertion of RA to PSA). With regard to claims 75, 76, 82, 83, 84 , 85, 95, and 96 this is accomplished by reacting a dicarboxylic acid with a cyclic acetic anhydride in the presence of a hydroxy-alkanoic acid (HA) . As in claim 77, The DA is a C6 – C15 alkylene or alkylene, such as SA. With regard to claim 78, the HA may be riconoleic acid (RA). Together, these disclosures reads on claim 79. As regards claim 81, the transforming of the esterified mono- and di-ester or mixture of DA is done my polymerization (Scheme 1). The polymerization reaction according to Scheme 1 occurs at 160 C (see temperature range in instant claims 83 and 84). The instant claims are anticipated by Krasko et al.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Claims 80 and 86 are objected to as dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS A AZPURU whose telephone number is (571)272-0588. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am- 3 pm, 4 pm-8pm.
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.
/CARLOS A AZPURU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1617 caz
Prosecution Insights