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 Objections
Claims 2-4 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2, in line 2, “polyamide-imides” should not be plural.
Regarding claim 4, in line 2, “polyalkylacrylates” should not be plural.
Regarding claim 8, in line 2, “base” should be changed to basic in order to pair with the use of acidic.
Regarding claim 3, this claim depends from an objected to claim and includes all of the limitations thereof. Therefore, it is also subject to the objection.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-5 and 32-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 recites the limitation "the nitrogen-containing heterocyclic cationic group" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of further examination, this limitation will be interpretated as referred to the heterocyclic cationic group of claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, this claim recites in line 2 that the resin backbone is insoluble. This is unclear because it does not state in what medium the resin backbone is insoluble. For the purpose of further examination, this limitation will be interpreted in the resin backbone being insoluble in water.
Regarding claims 32-35, claim 32 recites “a composition” and “the color change composition;” claim 33 refers to “the composition” and introduces “an alkaline composition” and “an acidic composition;” and claim 34 refers to “cleaning and/or sanitizing compositions.” The use of the term “composition” in this context becomes unclear, especially in claim 33 which has a reference to simply “the composition.” For the purpose of further examination, the first “a composition” in claim 32 will be interpreted as “a secondary composition;” the references to the color changing resin composition, the alkaline composition, the acidic composition will remain, and claim 34 will be interpreted as the alkaline composition or the acidic composition being used for the purpose of cleaning and/or sanitizing.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, these claims depend from a rejected claim and include all of the limitations thereof. Therefore, they are also rejected.
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.
Claims 4, 7, and 8 are 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.
Regarding claim 4, claim 2, from which claim 4 depends, lists six broad categories from which the resin backbone may be chosen. Claim 4 lists species which part of those broad categories. However, the polymers of polyurethane, polyphenol aldehyde, and polycaprolactam do not seem to fall into one of the six categories as they are defined in the instant specification. Therefore, claim 4 fails to further limit claim 2 in this regard. For the purpose of further examination, those three polymers will be treated as part of the claim. However, correction is required.
Regarding claim 7, claim 6, from which claim 7 depends, provides that the pH sensitive dye is an azo dye and claim 7 lists specific species of azo dyes. However, bromothymol blue, m-cresol purple, phenol red, thymol blue, xylenol blue, and xylenol orange are not azo dyes as they do not possess the R-N=N-R’ structure defined in claim 6. Therefore, claim 7 fails to limit claim 6 in this regard. For the purpose of further examination, these dyes will not be treated as part of the claim as they are not structurally azo dyes.
Regarding claim 8, this claim depends from a rejected claim and includes all of the limitations thereof. Therefore, it is also rejected.
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 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.
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 1-10 and 32-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lake et al. (US 2020/0353118) in view of Eagland et al. (US 2007/0276207).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, and 10, Lake et al. teaches a composition comprising a pH sensitive indicator comprising an azo dye (nitrated dye) and a substrate (resin backbone), wherein the azo dye is bound to or coated on (complexed to) the substrate (¶10). The substrate is polystyrene resin beads (water insoluble polymer) (¶137), however, it can also be a plastic surface, a composite surface, a glass surface or a metal surface (¶75).
Lake et al. does not teach that the resin backbone contains a heterocyclic cationic group such as a pyridinium monomer. However, Eagland et al. teaches a composition comprising a polymeric material that comprises a polyvinyl polymer and a nitrogen-containing heteroaromatic group such as a pyridinium group (cationic group) (¶31, 34, 37, 45) and an indicator means arranged to change color according to pH (¶9). Lake et al. and Eagland et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor as that of the instant invention, namely that of compositions to detect changes in pH. At the time of the filing of the instant invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to add the nitrogen-containing heteroaromatic monomer, as taught by Eagland et al., to the substrate/polystyrene resin, as taught by Lake et al., and would have been motivated to do so because using a cationic monomer, such as the pyridinium monomer of Eagland et al., with an anionic dye, such as the azo dyes of Lake et al., provides for a strong interaction between the dye and substrate leading to a stable composition in which the dye does not leach out.
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 further defines a limitation which is not required. Therefore, this limitation is also not required.
Regarding claim 5, the polystyrene beads of Lake et al. are insoluble as stated above, and the polymer will be in a crosslinked or un-crosslinked state.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Lake et al. teaches that the azo dye is an organic compound comprising one or more diazenyl functional groups, R—N=N—R’, wherein R and R′ are either an aryl group or an alkyl group having between 2 and 20 carbons (¶71). Specifically, the azo dye is Allura red AC, azo violet, basic red 18, Congo red, direct blue 1, direct brown 78, methyl orange, methyl red, para red, reactive orange 16, tartrazine, and combinations or mixtures thereof (¶72).
Regarding claim 8, Lake et al. teaches that the pH sensitive dye exhibits a color change at a pH of about 4.5 or less (acidic pH range) (¶73).
Regarding claim 9, the instant specification defines reusable as “allowing [the composition] to be used as indicators providing visual color change upon increases and decreases of pH over an extended period of time” (¶52 of instant PG-PUB). Lake et al. teaches that the composition containing the dye can be used in a cleaning composition to test its efficacy and that the pH can be modified if it is out of range (¶95). This means that the composition can provide a visual color change upon increases and decreases of pH over an extended period of time as a cleaning solution can last for months or longer.
Regarding claims 32-35, Lake et al. teaches a method of using the color changing composition to allow for visual indication of the concentration of a cleaning composition. A color change can indicate that a cleaning composition is either in or out of the required concentration to achieve a particular antimicrobial activity (¶68). Additionally, Lake et al. teaches that an alkaline or acidic pH modifier can be used in the compositions to produce an acidic or alkaline cleaning composition (¶110).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA C SCOTT whose telephone number is (571)270-3303. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30-5:00, 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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at 571-272-1197. 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.
/ANGELA C SCOTT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767