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 .
Response to Arguments
In light of amendments to claims 8, 9, and 20, the objection to the claims is withdrawn. In light of amendments to claims 1-4, 8, 10-12, 14, 17, and 20, the rejection under § 112(b) is withdrawn.
Applicant’s remarks with respect to claims 1, 3, and 4 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The references relied upon are Pasic (WO 2015085054 A1), Kukla (US 20070176093 A1), Wohlstadter (US 20010021534 A1), and Becker (US 20050072917 A1) that are listed in the IDS received, December 13, 2022, and pertinent prior art Zhou (US 20170291143 A1) and Lee (US 20030222012 A1) that are listed in the previous Office Action mailed, July 16, 2025. Applicants should consider the references made of record in response to the current Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-3, 6, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhou (US 20170291143 A1).
For claim 1, Zhou discloses a membrane (pars [0002]-[0006], [0038]; par [0044]: “…porous substrate…of the asymmetric composite membranes described herein may be asymmetric or symmetric. The porous substrate may include one layer or multiple layers. For example, there may be two, three, four, or more layers. In some embodiments, the porous substrate is hydrophobic. In other embodiments, the porous substrate is hydrophilic.”) for collecting airborne particles, wherein the membrane includes a strip composed of: a matrix formed from a mixture of a polymer and of a filler that is made of an electrical conductor (par [0139] “…the separation modules of the present disclosure may also include one or more fillers and/or pigments. Exemplary fillers include…fibers, electrically and/or thermally conducting particles, nanoparticles, hydrophilic or hydrophilic silica type fillers such as silica-gels, fumed silica, clays such as bentonite or wollastonite, organo-clays, aluminum-trihydrates, hollow-polymeric microspheres, and mineral fillers such as calcium silicates, phosphates, molybdates, calcium carbonate, calcium oxide, and talc, and any combinations thereof…inorganic or organic pigments including ferric oxide, brick dust, carbon black, titanium oxide, and the like”), and a hydrophilic layer for collecting particles (par [0044]), on which is deposited said matrix so as to form at least one composite layer, said membrane comprising at least one region obtained via a surface treatment of said hydrophilic layer (treatment of membrane disclosed at pars [0040]-[0044] and illustrated in Fig. 1). NOTE: The phrase “for collecting airborne particles” in line 1 is an intended result.
For claim 2, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Zhou further discloses the hydrophilic layer is based on cellulose (par [0049]).
For claim 3, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Zhou discloses the hydrophilic layer is based on a woven material (par [0047]).
For claim 6, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Zhou discloses the filler includes a carbon powder, mixed with said matrix (par [0139]: “…include one or more fillers and/or pigments. Exemplary fillers include particles, microspheres, expendable microspheres, glass beads, glass microspheres, fibers, electrically and/or thermally conducting particles, nanoparticles, hydrophilic or hydrophilic silica type fillers such as silica-gels, fumed silica, clays such as bentonite or wollastonite, organo-clays, aluminum-trihydrates, hollow-polymeric microspheres, and mineral fillers such as calcium silicates, phosphates, molybdates, calcium carbonate, calcium oxide, and talc, and any combinations thereof. Pigments may include inorganic or organic pigments including ferric oxide, brick dust, carbon black, titanium oxide, and the like”).
For claim 15, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Zhou discloses a hydrosoluble layer deposited on the hydrophilic layer (pars [0073]-[0075], [0081]-[0086], [0090]).
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (US 20170291143 A1).
For claim 4, the teaching of Zhou is relied upon indicated above and discloses said hydrophilic layer. Zhou does specifically state wherein the hydrophilic layer is based on a material that holds by capillarity a volume smaller than 30 µl/cm2 . Zhou does disclose microporous layers and teaches that the thickness of the porous substrate selected depend on the intended application of the membrane, and further teaches the thickness of the porous substrate (“T” in FIG. 1A) may be greater than 10 micrometers, μm (pars [0064]-[0066]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to select the thickness of the membrane for a material that holds by capillarity a volume smaller than 30 µ/cm2 to utilize the membrane for collection efficiency since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable like the thickness of the membrane involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 15, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20030222012 A1).
For claim 1, Lee discloses a membrane (membrane structure 120) for collecting airborne particles (pars [0007], [0022], [0044], [0045], [0083], [0084]), wherein the membrane includes a strip (Fig. 3; par [0084]) composed of: a matrix formed from a mixture of a polymer and of a filler that is made of metal (pars [0080], [0084]), and a hydrophilic layer for collecting particles (pars [0009], [0045], [0059]-[0061], [0092]), on which layer is deposited said matrix so as to form at least one composite layer, said membrane comprising at least one region obtained via a surface treatment of said hydrophilic layer. Lee does not appear state explicitly that the filler is made of an electrical conductor. Nonetheless, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that said filler made of metal would be considered an electrical conductor since metal conducts electricity, thereby establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
For claim 2, the teaching of Lee is relied upon as indicated above and discloses wherein the hydrophilic layer is based on cellulose (par [0060]).
For claim 4, Lee is relied upon as stated above but does not appear to state the membrane wherein the hydrophilic layer is based on a material that holds by capillarity a volume smaller than 30 µl/cm2. Lee does discuss that the thickness of the membranes varies between a few nanometers to up to hundreds of micrometers (pars [0050]- [0057]), membranes pore size is selected based on a particle size of the material sampled (par [0087]), and pore size is selected to isolate particles (par [0094]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to select the thickness of the membrane for a material that holds by capillarity a volume smaller than 30 µ/cm2 to utilize the membrane for particle isolation since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable like the pore size of the membrane involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.05.
For claim 5, Lee is relied upon as stated above and discloses wherein the matrix is made from a silicone-based material (pars [0050], [0086]).
For claim 15, Lee is relied upon as stated above and discloses a hydrosoluble layer deposited on the hydrophilic layer (par [0060]).
For claim 21, Lee is relied upon as stated above and discloses wherein the region of the hydrophilic layer is an etched region (par [0060]).
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 15, 17, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pasic (WO 2015085054 A1) in view of any one of Kukla (US 20070176093 A1), Wohlstadter (US 20010021534 A1), and Becker (US 20050072917 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pasic teaches lightweight, bidirectional composite ply sheets or electrostatic precipitator electrodes, membranes (Figs. 2-4; pars [0029]-[0037]). Related to claim 1 Pasic discloses a membrane for collecting airborne particles, wherein the membrane includes a strip composed of (“individual composite tapes 42-48” in par [0033]): a matrix formed from a mixture of a polymer and of a filler that is made of an electrical conductor (“sheet 100 can be individual composite tapes 42-48, in which a thermoplastic or thermoset matrix is reinforced with electrically conductive fibers, such as carbon fibers” in par [0033]).
Pasic does not specifically teach a hydrophilic layer for collecting particles, on which is deposited said matrix so as to form at least one composite layer, said membrane comprising at least one region obtained via a surface treatment of said hydrophilic layer. Kukla does disclose a hydrophilic layer for collecting particles deposited on a substrate surface, a measuring element (“coating is a hydrophilic coating, such that said analytes are held to a measuring element” in par [0013]; par [0016]—“In some embodiments, said measuring coating is at least partly a hydrophilic coating, i.e. said measuring coating extends over at least part of the measuring element surface and is a hydrophilic coating… enables…analytes…held to said measuring elements”). Wohlstadter teaches patterned binding domains for a multi-array, multi-specific binding surface having geometric shapes, triangles, squares and circles that represent binding domains specific for different analytes. Wohlstadter further discloses the binding domains are hydrophobic or hydrophilic, wherein the surrounding surface may have the opposite property (hydrophilic or hydrophobic) of the binding domains to minimize spreading of binding reagents or analyte from the binding domains (Fig. 5A; pars [0039], [0127]). Becker discloses an insoluble support, substrate, onto which a sample and/or matrix is deposited. Substates can be planar surfaces to receive or link samples at discrete loci that have hydrophilic regions (pars [0004],[0030]). Each of the prior art to Kukla, Wohlstandter, and Becker teaches a hydrophilic layer provided to a collection membrane that improves collecting and cleaning particles of a collection membrane (as recited in claim 1 lines 5-8). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention include a hydrophilic layer for collecting particles as disclosed in the prior art references of any one of Kukla, Wohlstandter, and Becker, thus forming a composite layer, that improves collection efficacy with a reasonable expectation of success.
For claim 2, the prior art is relied upon as stated above and teaches the membrane according to Claim 1. Becker further teaches wherein the hydrophilic layer is based on cellulose (pars [0025], [0027]).
For claim 3, the prior art is relied upon as stated above. Pasic further teaches wherein the hydrophilic layer is based on a woven material (Fig. 3; par [0031]).
For claim 4, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above but does not appear to disclose the hydrophilic layer is based on a material that holds by capillarity a volume smaller than 30 μl/cm2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention select the material to optimize the volume smaller than 30 µ/cm2 to control the air delivery rate designed for the efficacy of the hydrophilic layer since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable like the volume involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.05.
For claim 6, the prior art is relied upon as stated above. Pasic further teaches wherein the filler includes a carbon powder, mixed with said matrix (par [0029]).
For claim 7, the prior art is relied upon as stated above. Pasic further teaches wherein the filler includes a graphite powder (par [0035]).
For claim 15, the prior art is relied upon as stated above. Wohlstandter further teaches binding domains that specifically bind to at least one analyte of interest comprising a hydrosoluble layer deposited on the hydrophilic layer (par [0178]).
For claim 17, the combined teaching of the prior art is relied upon as indicated above. Pasic further discloses an electrostatic precipitator of airborne particles (par [0002]), comprising a collecting unit (pars [0002]-[0003];Figs. 1, 4, 6), and precipitating means configured to force said airborne particles towards said collecting unit (par [0002]), wherein the collecting unit incorporates a collecting membrane as discussed above and defined in claim 1.
For claim 21, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above but does not appear to disclose wherein the region of the hydrophilic layer is an etched region. Nonetheless, Becker does disclose a target site is etched on a surface of the support (par [0058]). Since Becker discloses an insoluble support, substrate, onto which a sample and/or matrix is deposited (pars [0004],[0030]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to envisage the combined teaching of Pasic and Becker to include the hydrophilic layer having an etched region.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pasic (WO 2015085054 A1) taken with any one of Kukla (US 20070176093 A1), Wohlstadter (US 20010021534 A1), and Becker (US 20050072917 A1) in further view of Pasic ‘643 (US 6231643 B1).
For claim 5, the prior art is relied upon as stated above but does not appear to disclose explicitly the matrix is made from a silicone-based material. Pasic ‘643 discloses silicones can be good membrane matrix candidates since carbon-fiber-reinforced silicones can be used continuously at high temperatures (col. 12, ll. 36-44). Therefore, a silicone-based polymer matrix composite may be used to produce composite membranes that can be used to dislodge particles effectively while still operating at high temperatures. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to combined the teaching of the prior art with the matrix disclosed in Pasic ‘643 in order to produce the matrix made from a silicone-based material to have the added benefit of high-temperature operations.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art to Pasic, Kukla, Wohlstadter, Becker, Zhou, and Lee are considered to be the closest prior art of record.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art fails to disclose the membrane according to claim 1, wherein the hydrophilic layer has a total area and comprises at least a first region, referred to as a collection region, obtained via said surface treatment in a first portion of the total area and at least a second region produced in a second portion of the total area, the hydrophilic layer having a first thickness in the collection region and a second thickness in the second region, the first thickness being smaller than the second thickness.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record fails to disclose the hydrophilic layer is treated to form an electrical contact-redistribution region of area smaller than the total area, said region being obtained via said surface treatment of said hydrophilic layer over a thickness equal to total thickness of the hydrophilic layer.
Regarding claim 16, the prior art of record above fails to disclose a process for manufacturing the collecting membrane such as defined in claim 1, the process comprising the steps of: forming a carrier formed from said hydrophilic layer, depositing on said carrier the matrix formed from a mixture of the polymer and of the filler made of electrical conductor, polymerizing the polymer, carrying out a surface treatment on the hydrophilic layer, in order to form said region.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record provided as set forth above fails to disclose the electrostatic precipitator according to claim 17, comprising a fluidic circuit for eluting the airborne particles collected by the collecting membrane, said eluting fluidic circuit comprising at least one fluidic channel that opens onto said collecting membrane.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art of record is provided above and fails to teach the electrostatic precipitator according to claim 17, comprising a component with a channel for collecting the particles and wherein the collecting membrane is arranged to carpet at least partially said collecting channel.
Regarding claims 8, 9, 16, 18, and 19, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date to provide modifications to the prior art references and arrive at the present invention because the prior art of record does not suggest motivations to do so.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure for example:
US 20160195488 A1 & US 20200166494 A1: a chemical sensor with a plurality of fibers in which the electrical impedance varies upon exposure to a chemical species; a substrate supporting and electrically isolating the fibers; a set of electrodes connected to the plurality of fibers at spatially separated points to permit the electrical impedance of the plurality of fibers to be measured; and a membrane encasing the fibers and having a thickness ranging from 50 μm to 5.0 mm.
US 20220196521 A1: apparatus for collecting and analyzing airborne particles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SONJI TURNER whose telephone number is (571)272-1203. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:00 am - 2:00 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/SONJI TURNER/
Examiner, Art Unit 1776
January 27, 2026/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776