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 Status
Claims 2-21 are pending. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Claims 2-5 in the reply filed on 09 February 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 6-21 are hereby withdrawn.
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.
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vinu et al. (J. Phys. Chem. B, 2008, 112, 8928-8935), hereinafter “Vinu”.
With respect to claims 2-4, Vinu teaches a random, 50/50 mol% poly(acrylamide-co-acrylic acid) polymer (see Abstract; Page 8929, left column, second full paragraph), wherein acrylic acid satisfies Formula (I) when X1 = O and R1-R3 and R7 = H, and wherein acrylamide satisfies Formula (II) when A = C(=O), X2 = NH, and R4-R6 and R8 = H.
Vinu reports the amount of acrylic acid and acrylamide as mol % (Page 8929, left column, second full paragraph), so converting to wt % for acrylic acid, for example, would be equivalent to 50.34 wt% acrylic acid, the balance being 49.66 wt% acrylamide: ((50 mol% * 72.06 g/mol acrylic acid)/((50 mol% * 72.06 g/mol acrylic acid) + (50 mol% * 71/08 g/mol acrylamide)) = 50.34 wt% acrylic acid), meeting the limitations of a and b in Claim 2.
Regrading claim 5, since Vinu teaches a polymer according to claim 2, it is submitted that the lower critical solution temperature range of “about 0°C to about 100°C” is met as an inherent property. Where the Patent Office has reason to believe that a functional limitation asserted to be critical for establishing novelty in the claimed subject matter may, in fact, be an inherent characteristic of the prior art, it possesses the authority to require applicant to prove that the subject matter shown to be in the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied upon. In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 169 USPQ 226 (CCPA 1971).
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yin et al. (Biomacromolecules, 2006, 7, 1381-1385), hereinafter “Yin”.
With respect to claims 2-4, Yin teaches random, poly(N-isopropylacrylamide-co-acrylic acid) polymer (sees Abstract; Page 1383, Table 1), with a specific examples of NIPAAm-co-PAA28 having 28 mol% acrylic acid and NIPAAm-co-PAA39 having 39 mol% acrylic acid (entries 5 and 6 in Table 1). N-isopropylacrylamide satisfies Formula (I) when A = C(=O), X1 = NH, R1-R3 = H, and R7 = C3 unsubstituted alkyl, and wherein acrylic acid satisfies Formula (II) when X2= O and R1-R3 and R7 = H.
Yin reports the amount of acrylic acid as a mol % in Table 1, so converting to wt % for NIPAAm-co-PAA39, for example, would be equivalent to 29.11 wt% acrylic acid, the balance being 70.89 wt% N-isopropylacrylamide: ((39.2 mol% * 72.06 g/mol acrylic acid)/((39.2 mol% * 72.06 g/mol acrylic acid) + (60.8 mol% * 113.16g/mol N-isopropylacrylamide)) = 29.11 wt% acrylic acid). For the NIPAAm-co-PAA28 polymer: ((27.8 mol % * 72.06 g/mol acrylic acid)/((27.8 mol % * 72.06 g/mol acrylic acid) + (72.2 mol% * 113.16 g/mol N-isopropylacrylamide)) = 19.7 wt% acrylic acid, 80.3 wt% N-isopropylacrylamide). Both NIPAAm-co-PAA28 and NIPAAm-co-PAA39 are specific multi-component polymers that meet the percentages recited in a and b of claim 2.
Regarding claim 5, Yin teaches a lower critical solution temperature (LCST) of 20°C for the NIPAAm-co-PAA28 and an LCST of about 6°C for NIPAAm-co-PAA39 (See Fig. 1: Page 1383), wherein 20°C and 6°C are discrete embodiments within “ about 0°C to about 100°C”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARE M PERRIN whose telephone number is (571)270-5952. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Bob Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/CLARE M. PERRIN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1779
/CLARE M PERRIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779 19 February 2026
Prosecution Insights