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 of Group I, claims 1-6, and species Span 80 and liquid paraffin, in the reply filed on 09/03/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Status of the Claims
Claims 7-10 have been withdrawn. Therefore, claims 1-6 are pending and currently under examination (claim set filed 09/03/2025).
Priority
The instant application filed on 03/27/2023 claims priority to CN202211680006.9 filed on 12/26/2022. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in CN202211680006.9 on December 26, 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN202211680006.9 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Therefore, the effective filing date of the instant application is 03/27/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/27/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawing Objections
The drawings are objected to because a higher quality or color image for Figure 1 is requested. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b), Indefiniteness
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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.
Claim 1 recites “HLB”; however, abbreviations must be spelled out upon first use.
Claim 2 contains the trademark/trade name RHEOCRYSTA. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe cellulose nanofibrils and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claims 3-6 are included in this rejection for depending on rejected claim 1 and failing to rectify the noted deficiencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103, Obviousness
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.
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.
Claims 1 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du (CN 112619612; Date of Publication: April 9, 2021 – cited in the IDS filed on 03/27/2023) in view of Bengtson (CN 111989155; Date of Publication: November 24, 2020 – cited in the IDS filed on 03/27/2023), Ma (CN 101293191; Date of Publication: October 29, 2008), and Fan (CN 108905978; Date of Publication: November 30, 2018).
Du’s general disclosure pertains to “a preparation method of high-strength cellulose-agarose composite microspheres”, wherein the invention comprises “dissolving, cross-linking, emulsification and regeneration” to generate a “uniformly cross-linked cellulose-agarose composite microsphere” (see, e.g., Du, English Translation, Abstract). Moreover, Du discloses that the generated composite microspheres have “higher mechanical strength than single cellulose microspheres, and are easy to operate, with mild conditions, less energy consumption, high utilization of raw materials, and easy large-scale production” (see, e.g., Du, English Translation, Abstract).
Regarding claim 1 pertaining to the preparation method of the agarose-cellulose nanocomposite porous gel microsphere, Du teaches “Under the condition of ice water bath at 0 ℃, 5 g of cellulose powder is dissolved in 45 mL of water containing 5 g of sodium hydroxide and 4 g of thiourea, and the solution is centrifuged and defoamed; 1.25 g agarose was dissolved in 40 mL water containing 2 g lithium hydroxide and 8 g urea, frozen at -20 ℃ for 4 hours, thawed at room temperature with stirring, thawed, and centrifuged to remove air. Mixing cellulose and agarose solution according to a ratio of 4:1, dropwise adding a cross-linking agent epichlorohydrin in an ice-water bath, and simultaneously carrying out mechanical stirring at a rotation speed of 10000 rpm for 30 min; and after the solution obtained in the last step is centrifuged and degassed, 100 mL of liquid paraffin is taken, 0.25 g of Span85 and 0.75 g of Tween60 which serve as continuous phases are added, mechanical stirring is carried out (2000 rpm) for 1.5 h, and then a proper amount of about 5% diluted acid solution (such as hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid and the like or organic acid such as citric acid and the like) is added into the emulsion for regeneration, so as to prepare the cellulose-agarose composite microspheres” (see, e.g., Du, English Translation, Example 1, pg. 3). Additionally, Du teaches the addition of Span 80 during emulsification (see, e.g., Du, Claim 1), wherein one of ordinary skill in the art would readily understand that Span 80 has a low HLB value that is between 3 and 8, and this HLB value is an inherent property of Span 80.
Regarding claim 5 pertaining to the agarose and nanocellulose parts by weight, Du teaches “Mixing cellulose and agarose solution according to a ratio of 4:1” (see, e.g., Du, English Translation, Example 1, pg. 3).
Regarding claim 6 pertaining to the organic solvent and the emulsifier, Du teaches liquid paraffin as the organic solvent (see, e.g., Du, English Translation, Example 1, pg. 3). Additionally, Du teaches the addition of Span 80 during emulsification (see, e.g., Du, Claim 1).
However, Du does not teach: wherein the nanocellulose and agarose are heated under stirring until the agarose is completely dissolved (claim 1); or preparing the agarose-cellulose nanocomposite porous gel microsphere through a reverse-phase emulsification (claim 1); or wherein the water phase is poured into an oil phase heated to 50-90oC (claim 1); or wherein a rotation speed is adjusted so that the water phase is dispersed into a droplet of a required particle size, the emulsion is cooled at a rate of 2°C per minute to below 20°C to gel the droplet of the water phase, and an uncrosslinked agarose-cellulose nanocomposite gel microsphere is obtained after washing (claim 1); or wherein the epichlorohydrin is 1-20% based on a volume of the microsphere (claim 1).
Bengtson’s general disclosure relates to separation matrices comprising polysaccharide gel beads, wherein the polysaccharide gel beads comprise embedded fibers (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, Abstract). Moreover, Bengtson discloses “separation matrix particles, more particularly to polysaccharide-based chromatography matrices comprising embedded fibers for the separation of biological agents such as proteins, nucleic acids and viruses” (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Field of the Invention”, pg. 2). Additionally, Bengtson discloses that the separation matrices exhibit high porosity and/or high rigidity for improved separation of biological agents” (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Summary of the Invention”, pg. 2).
Regarding claim 1 pertaining to the preparation method of the agarose-cellulose nanocomposite porous gel microsphere, Bengtson teaches “Agarose was dispersed in water. The agarose-water dispersion was heated above its melting temperature (about 85 ℃) and the cellulose was added as a hot aqueous suspension and dispersed in the agarose by using a motor-driven propeller blade stirrer. Agarose and cellulose were added and mixed in different ratios and different total concentrations” (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Preparation of agarose and cellulose solutions”, pg. 4). Bengtson teaches for the oil phase, “Toluene and dissolved emulsifier (Aqualon) were added before adding the agarose and cellulose containing solution was heated to 60 ℃”(see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Oil phase”, pg. 4). Moreover, Bengtson teaches that “The water droplets are formed and dispersed in the oil phase by a turbine agitator and their particle size in the emulsion is adjusted by the agitator speed, forming smaller particles at higher speeds” (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Transferring the agarose solution to an emulsion reactor”, pg. 4). Bengtson teaches that “when the particles reach the desired size (e.g., 100 µm diameter), the emulsion is cooled to room temperature” (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Cooling process”, pg. 4), and “The gel particles were washed first with ethanol and then with water” (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Gel washing and sieving”, pg. 4). Additionally, Bengtson teaches that “The non-allylated samples were crosslinked using epichlorohydrin at 50℃” (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Cross-linking”, pg. 4).
Ma’s general disclosure relates to “an agarose gel microsphere, which is characterized in that the average granule diameter is less than 10 micron, the agarose content in the microsphere is up to 20wt percent and the granule diameter distribution coefficient C.V. is less than 15 percent. The present invention also provides a preparation method of the microsphere, which solves the problems that the preparation process of the traditional emulsification method is slow, the granule diameter of the agarose gel microsphere is uneven and the traditional method is difficult to prepare the agarose gel microsphere with granule diameter less than 10 micron and agarose content cannot exceed 12wt percent” (see, e.g., Ma, English Translation, Abstract).
Regarding claim 1 pertaining to the cooling rate of the emulsion, Ma teaches “When gelling and solidifying, the cooling rate should be slow, and the cooling range should be less than 2°C/min” (see, e.g., Ma, English Translation, “2) Preparation of agarose gel microspheres”, pg. 4).
Fan’s general disclosure relates to a high-strength polysaccharide gel microsphere for chromatographic separation, wherein a modified polysaccharide chain is covalently cross-linked to the gel fibers in order to produce a gel microsphere with high mechanical strength (see, e.g., Fan, English Translation, Abstract & “Summary of the Invention”, pg. 2). Moreover, Fan teaches the use of epichlorohydrin as a crosslinker (see, e.g., Fan, English Translation, “Summary of the Invention, pg. 6).
Regarding claim 1 pertaining to the percentage of epichlorohydrin, Fan teaches that 1-20% of epichlorohydrin is added to the microsphere solution (see, e.g., Fan, English Translation, Claim 9, pg. 16).
Moreover, regarding claim 1’s percentage limitation for epichlorohydrin, MPEP 2144.05 states “Generally, difference in concentrations or temperatures will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine optimization.” Those working in the biological and/or pharmaceutical arts would understand that the adjustments of particular conventional working conditions (e.g., concentration, amounts, and/or percentages of a compound) is deemed a matter of judicious selection and routine optimization, which is within the purview of the skilled artisan. For example, Fan states “those skilled in the art can choose completely reactive groups and the inert groups according to their own knowledge mastered and prior art or new technology claims the technology content, so as to determine the bifunctional crosslinking agent to be selected” (see, e.g., Fan, English Translation, “Summary of the Invention”, pg. 3). Additionally, Fan teaches those skilled in the art can modify embodiments to improve upon the claimed ranges (see, e.g., Fan, English Translation, “Summary of the Invention”, pg. 14), which one of ordinary skill in the art can interpret as improving upon the percentages/concentrations of epichlorohydrin. Moreover, Fan teaches that epichlorohydrin increases the gel microsphere strength (see, e.g., Fan, English Translation, “Summary of the Invention”, pg. 7); therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would realize that altering the amount of epichlorohydrin will affect the strength of the gel microsphere. This is motivation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to practice or test the parameter widely to find those that are functional or optimal which then would be inclusive or cover the steps as instantly claimed. Absent any teaching of criticality by the Applicant concerning the percentage, it would be prima facie obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize these limitations are a result effective variables which can be met as a matter of routine optimization.
It would have been first obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to produce Du’s cellulose-agarose composite microspheres, wherein the microspheres are produced using reverse-phase emulsification and adjusting the rotational speed during the emulsification, as taught by Bengtson. One would have been motivated to do so because Bengtson teaches that addition of a water phase into an oil phase (i.e., reverse-phase emulsification), results in the formation of gel beads within the aqueous solution, wherein the temperature of the emulsion can also be lowered in order to induce gelation (see, e.g., Bengtson, “Detailed description of the embodiments”, pg. 3). Additionally, Bengtson teaches that “The water droplets are formed and dispersed in the oil phase by a turbine agitator and their particle size in the emulsion is adjusted by the agitator speed, forming smaller particles at higher speeds” (see, e.g., Bengtson, English Translation, “Transferring the agarose solution to an emulsion reactor”, pg. 4). Moreover, Du teaches the production of agarose-cellulose gel microspheres through reverse-phase emulsification with mechanical stirring (see, e.g., Du, Example 1, pg. 3). Additionally, Du teaches that these emulsification methods are simple, convenient, consume less energy, and are have large-scale production (see, e.g., Du, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 3). Therefore, based on the teachings of Du and Bengtson, it would have been obvious to perform reverse-phase emulsification and mechanical stirring at various speeds in order to produce agarose-cellulose gel microspheres. One would have expected success because Du and Bengtson both teach methods of producing gel microspheres using emulsification and mechanical stirring.
It would have been secondly obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to produce Du’s cellulose-agarose composite microspheres, wherein the cooling rate should be less than 2°C/min, as taught by Ma. One would have been motivated to do so because Ma teaches that slowing cooling the emulsion at a rate of 2°C/min, as well as slowing stirring while cooling, allows for the emulsion droplets to gel and solidify in order to obtain the gel microspheres (see, e.g., Ma, “2) Preparation of agarose gel microspheres”, pg. 4). Moreover, Du teaches lowering the emulsion in order to completely solidify the agarose during production of the microspheres (see, e.g., Du, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 2). Additionally, Du teaches that these emulsification methods are simple, convenient, consume less energy, and are have large-scale production (see, e.g., Du, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 3). One would have expected success because Du and Ma both teach the production of agarose gel microspheres.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du, Bengtson, Ma, and Fan as applied to claims 1 and 5-6 above, and further in view of Im (Morphological characteristics of carboxymethylated cellulose nanofibrils: the effect of carboxyl content; 2018 – cited in the IDS filed on 03/27/2023) and Wang (US 2020/0362128; Date of Publication: November 19, 2020).
The previous teachings of Du, Bengtson, Ma, and Fan, herein referred to as modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan, are discussed above as it pertains to producing a agarose-cellulose nanocomposite porous gel microsphere.
However, modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan does not teach: wherein the nanocellulose is cellulose nanofibrils modified by carboxymethylation (claim 2); or wherein the nanocellulose is cellulose nanocrystal obtained by hydrolysis of microcrystalline cellulose (claim 2); or wherein the nanocellulose is present in an aggregated state with a diameter of 2-100 nm and a length of less than 10 µm, is fibril-shaped or rod-shaped, and is not comb-shaped or fork-shaped (claim 3).
Im’s general disclosure relates to “the effects of carboxyl content and mechanical treatment intensity on the morphological characteristics of carboxymethylated cellulose nanofibrils (CM CNFs) and on the rheological properties of CM CNF suspension. The mechanical properties of self-standing CM CNF film were also examined. CM CNFs produced under different conditions had similar, uniform widths of about 5 nm, as measured using transmission electron microscope images and Image J software. The aspect ratios of three CM CNFs were evaluated using gel point analysis and the crowding number theory. Higher carboxyl content in the CM CNFs reduced the amount of mechanical energy required and increased the aspect ratio” (see, e.g., Im, Abstract).
Regarding claim 2 pertaining to the nanocellulose, Im teaches cellulose nanofibrils that are carboxymethylated (see, e.g., Im, Abstract).
Regarding claim 3 pertaining to the nanocellulose, Im teaches uniform widths of the nanofibrils of about 5 nm (see, e.g., Im, Abstract). Additionally, Im teaches that the length was less than 1 µm and the diameter was approximately 5-15 nm (see, e.g., Im, “Aspect ratios of CM CNFs manufactured under different conditions”, pg. 5786). Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would readily understand that the nanofibrils are fibril-shaped.
Wang’s general disclosure relates to “a method for fabricating patterned cellulose nanocrystal (CNC) composite nanofibers and thin films for optical and electromagnetic sensor and actuator application, comprising the following steps of: selecting materials for fabricating patterned cellulose nanocrystal (CNC) composite nanofibers; and fabricating patterned CNCs composite nanofibers by incorporating secondary phases either during electrospinning or post-processing, wherein the secondary phases may include dielectrics, electrically or magnetically activated nanoparticles or polymers and biological cells in mechanically reinforced by CNCs” (see, e.g., Wang, Abstract).
Regarding claim 2 pertaining to obtaining the cellulose nanocrystal, Wang teaches “CNCs are elongated rod-like or whisker shaped particles remaining after acid hydrolysis of either wood and plants pulps, microcrystalline celluloses (MCCs), microfibril celluloses (MFCs) or nanofibrillated celluloses (NFCs)” (see, e.g., Wang, [0004]).
It would have been first obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to produce modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan’s cellulose-agarose composite microspheres, wherein the nanocellulose is cellulose nanofibrils that are carboxymethylated, have a length that was less than 1 µm, and have a diameter that was approximately 5-15 nm, as taught by Im. One would have been motivated to do so because Im teaches that the carboxymethylated cellulose nanofibrils “with the highest aspect ratio had the greatest network strength in suspension and produced the film with the strongest mechanical properties” (see, e.g., Im, “Conclusions”, pg. 5787). Additionally, Im teaches that the carboxymethylated cellulose nanofibrils had uniform widths of 5 nm, with the length being less than 1 µm and the diameter being approximately 5-15 nm (see, e.g., Im, Abstract & Aspect ratios of CM CNFs manufactured under different conditions”, pg. 5786). Moreover, modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan teaches agarose-cellulose gel microspheres, wherein the agarose imparts higher mechanical strength to the single cellulose material, and the cross-linking agent increases the mechanical strength by increasing the cross-linking density (see, e.g., Du, abstract). Therefore, based on the teachings of modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan and Im, it would have been obvious to produce the agarose-cellulose gel microspheres using carboxymethylated cellulose nanofibrils in order to further increase the mechanical strength of the gel microspheres. One would have expected success because modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan and Im both teach compositions comprising cellulose with high mechanical strength.
It would have been secondly obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to produce modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan’s cellulose-agarose composite microspheres, wherein the cellulose nanocrystal is produced by hydrolysis of microcrystalline cellulose, as taught by Wang. One would have been motivated to do so because Want teaches that cellulose nanocrystal can be produced by acid hydrolysis of microcrystalline celluloses, wherein the diameters are in the range of 3 to 20 nm and lengths are in the range of 100 to 600 nm (see, e.g., Wang, [0004]). Additionally, Wang teaches that cellulose nanocrystals exhibit “excellent mechanical properties, including high tensile strain, and unique optical properties, such as high birefringence” (see, e.g., Wang, [0005]). Moreover, modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan teaches agarose-cellulose gel microspheres, wherein the agarose imparts higher mechanical strength to the single cellulose material, and the cross-linking agent increases the mechanical strength by increasing the cross-linking density (see, e.g., Du, abstract). Therefore, based on the teachings of modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan and Wang, it would have been obvious to produce the agarose-cellulose gel microspheres using cellulose nanocrystal derived from microcrystalline cellulose because the cellulose nanocrystals exhibit high mechanical properties, which would further increase the mechanical strength of the gel microspheres. One would have expected success because modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan and Wang both teach compositions comprising cellulose with high mechanical strength.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du, Bengtson, Ma, and Fan as applied to claims 1 and 5-6 above, and further in view of Duan (CN 111286049; Date of Publication: June 16, 2020).
The previous teachings of Du, Bengtson, Ma, and Fan, herein referred to as modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan, are discussed above as it pertains to producing a agarose-cellulose nanocomposite porous gel microsphere.
However, modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan does not teach: wherein a crystalline region is provided in the nanocellulose, and surface of the nanocellulose has a molecular chain of cellulose (claim 4).
Duan’s general disclosure relates to preparation of a cellulose porous ball crystal micro-sphere, wherein the methods comprise the steps of “dissolving cellulose using ionic liquid, carrying out isothermal retreatment, and carrying out ultrasonic stripping to obtain the cellulose porous spherical microsphere” (see, e.g., Duan, English Translation, Abstract). Moreover, Duan discloses “The cellulose spherulite microsphere material is completely composed of cellulose, and has controllable size, small and uniform pore diameter. The method overcomes the defect that cellulose microspheres prepared by adding a forming agent are difficult to recycle and degrade, and simplifies the preparation process” (see, e.g., Duan, English Translation, Abstract).
Regarding claim 4 pertaining to the nanocellulose, Duan teaches the production of a cellulose crystal microsphere that “depends on the self-assembly of molecular chains in the cellulose crystallization process to obtain cellulose spherulites” (see, e.g., Duan, English Translation, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 2). Moreover, Duan teaches “The invention adopts ionic liquid to dissolve cellulose, cellulose spherulites are obtained by means of self-assembly of molecular chains in the cellulose crystallization process, and then amorphous regions and the ionic liquid are removed by ultrasound to obtain the cellulose spherulites microspheres completely consisting of the cellulose (see, e.g., Duan, English Translation, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 2). Duan teaches that this method is used to “solve the problem that the existence of chemicals in the cellulose microsphere causes difficult recovery and treatment” (see, e.g., Duan, English Translation, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 2). Furthermore, Duan teaches “The microsphere prepared by the method completely consists of cellulose, is nontoxic and good in biocompatibility, and is convenient to recycle and degrade after use. The size of the microspheres can be controlled by crystallization humidity, temperature and crystallization time. The method can regulate and control the size of the microsphere by changing the humidity, the temperature and the time of crystallization, and the size range is between 100 and 400 microns. A large number of nano-scale holes exist on the surface and inside of the microsphere due to the removal of the amorphous region and the ionic liquid, and the pore size is between 2 and 50 nanometers, so that the microsphere has wide application prospects in the fields of adsorption and carriers” (see, e.g., Duan, English Translation, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to produce modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan’s cellulose-agarose composite microspheres, wherein the nanocellulose has a crystalline region and a molecular chain of cellulose, as taught by Duan. One would have been motivated to do so because Duan teaches The microsphere prepared by the method completely consists of cellulose, is nontoxic and good in biocompatibility, and is convenient to recycle and degrade after use. The size of the microspheres can be controlled by crystallization humidity, temperature and crystallization time. The method can regulate and control the size of the microsphere by changing the humidity, the temperature and the time of crystallization, and the size range is between 100 and 400 microns” (see, e.g., Duan, English Translation, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 2). Additionally, Duan teaches “The invention adopts ionic liquid to dissolve cellulose, cellulose spherulites are obtained by means of self-assembly of molecular chains in the cellulose crystallization process, and then amorphous regions and the ionic liquid are removed by ultrasound to obtain the cellulose spherulites microspheres completely consisting of the cellulose (see, e.g., Duan, English Translation, “Disclosure of Invention”, pg. 2). Moreover, modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan teaches agarose-cellulose gel microspheres, wherein the agarose imparts higher mechanical strength to the single cellulose material, and the cross-linking agent increases the mechanical strength by increasing the cross-linking density (see, e.g., Du, abstract). Therefore, based on the teachings of modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan and Duan, it would have been obvious to produce agarose-cellulose gel microspheres, wherein a crystalline region is provided in the nanocellulose and has a molecular chain of nanocellulose at the surface. One would have expected success because modified-Du-Bengtson-Ma-Fan and Duan both teach the production of microspheres comprising cellulose.
Conclusion
Claims 1-6 are rejected.
No claims are allowed.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATALIE IANNUZO whose telephone number is (703)756-5559. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri: 8:30-6:00 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, Sharmila Landau can be reached at (571) 272-0614. 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.
/NATALIE IANNUZO/Examiner, Art Unit 1653
/SHARMILA G LANDAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1653