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 .
Detailed Action
Previous Rejections
Applicants' arguments, filed 08/22/25 have been fully considered. Rejections and/or objections not reiterated from previous office actions are hereby withdrawn. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (WO 2018/169331, translation attached) in view of Payton et al. (US PG Pub. 2018/0168164A1), Min et al. (KR 1020120112968, presented in IDS), Kalita et al. ( US PG Pub. 2024/ 0180161 A1) and Webster et al. (US PG Pub. 2013/0129788A1).
Hwang et al. discloses a method for producing an antibacterial food packaging material containing a metal nanoparticle, and an antibacterial food packaging material produced thereby and, particularly, to a method for producing an antibacterial food packaging material, in which a metal nanoparticle, such as copper, brass, bronze, silver, and zinc, is uniformly dispersed in a thin polymer film, and the resulting film is laminated on a polymer film having excellent thermal and mechanical properties, see abstract. Hwang et al. teaches preparing a polymer chip having a metal nanoparticles deposited thereon, preparing a metal nanoparticle-containing polymer film by using the polymer chip having the metal nanoparticles deposited thereon; the present invention is characterized in that the polymer chip in which the metal nanoparticles are deposited on the surface is manufactured by a vacuum deposition method in a vacuum deposition tank. The vacuum evaporation method is characterized in that the metal vapor particles are generated to be attached directly to the polymer chip while stirring the polymer chip in the vacuum deposition tank provided with a metal deposition source and a stirring tank containing the polymer chip, see translation, tech solution. The metal nanoparticles have antibacterial and antiseptic properties and are preferably copper, silver and of eh size from 2 to 30nm, see best mode of the translation. The polymer used in the manufacture of the chip are polyethylene (LLDPE), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), high-density polyethylene (HDPE), polypropylene (PP), polysufone (PS), polycarbonete (PC), polyvinylchloride (PVC), ABS (Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene) and PET (Polyethyleneterephthalate) are used. The size of the polymer chip is not limited but is preferably 1 to 5 mm, more preferably 2 to 3 mm, see manufacturing process disclosed by the art. The antibacterial effect is shown on Staphylococcus aureus and 3.2 for Escherichia coli, see table of the translation.
Hwang et al. do not teach use of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles, hafnium nanoparticles, stainless steel nanoparticles and wollastonite nanoparticles as claimed.
Payton teaches inorganic nanoparticulate comprising antimicrobial metal, which is in nanoparticle size, see title and abstract. The reference teaches use of antimicrobial or any metal that has a toxic effect on one or microbes such as copper, silver, hafnium, wollastonite, see [0033], [0095] and [0073].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized nanoparticles of hafnium and Wollastonite deposited on additional polymer chip of Hwang et al. for additional antimicrobial purpose motivated by the teachings of Payton et al. teaching use of the known nanoparticles of antimicrobial hafnium and Wollastonite wherein wide variety of applications of such particles can be found including films, see [0002] and [0012].
The refences discussed above do not teach use of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles, and stainless steel nanoparticles.
Min et al. teaches use of antimicrobial polyurethane films carrying apatite, see [0001]. Min et al. teaches a method for manufacturing a polyurethane film having excellent moisture-permeable waterproof properties and antibacterial properties by developing polyurethane microbeads in the film and combining silver ion-carrying apatite (see [0001]). Min et al. teaches hydroxyapatite in 100 to 200nm is disclosed in the manufacturing process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized nanoparticles of hydroxyapatite into the antimicrobial polymer chip of Hwang et al. for an added antimicrobial properties motivated by the teachings of Min et al. teaching use of nanoparticulate hydroxyapatite used in antimicrobial film.
The references discussed above do not teach use of stainless steel nanoparticles.
Kalita et al. teaches nanohybrid structures containing antimicrobial nanoparticles, see title. Kalita et al. teaches forming unique nanohybrid structures through selective integration of inorganic antimicrobial nanoparticles with other inorganic and organic materials and then, chemically bonding the nanohybrid structures to organic polymers for application as surface coatings, antimicrobial surfacing, food packaging, biomedical, agricultural, air-filtration/cleaning and water filtration/cleaning applications to kill, inhibit, and/or reduce the growth of pathogenic/infectious/contaminating microorganisms and their biofilms, see abstract. The reference teaches use of stainless steel nanoparticles in biomedical applications comprising antimicrobial nanoparticles, see abstract, [0026], [0031], [0032] and figure on page 1.
And Webster et al. teaches that implant surfaces can be modified which can be of stainless steel in nanotubular structure, see title, abstract and [0061].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the nanoparticulate stainless steel into the antimicrobial nanoparticulate composition of Hwang et al for added antimicrobial properties due to nanotubular structures comprising nanoparticulate antimicrobials of Kalita et al. and further motivated by Webster teachings that stainless steel surfaces can be modified to nanotubular structures. Therefore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Note: MPEP 2141 KSR International CO. v. Teleflex Inc. 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007).
Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of new rejections made above necessitated by claim amendments.
Action is final
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SNIGDHA MAEWALL whose telephone number is (571)272-6197. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM to 5PM.
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, Sahana S. Kaup can be reached on 571-272-6897. 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.
/SNIGDHA MAEWALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612