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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1-17 are pending and presented for examination.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: There is no brief description of the several views of the drawings.
Appropriate correction is required.
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 2, “SO2” should correctly be “SO2”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
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.
2. Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gronwald et al. (WO 2019/042749) in view of Vandeputte et al. (WO 2013/107822).
I. Regarding claims 1-10, 16 and 17, Gronwald teaches a solution (Example 1, page 13) comprising: Ultrason P 3010 at page 13, lines 13-15 (and note that Applicant’s disclosure recites that Ultrason P polymers having a molecular weight of 40,000-60,000 and will have at least 30 wt% of aromatic carbon atoms, see page 5, lines 1-6 of Applicant’s disclosure and have a formula
PNG
media_image1.png
208
695
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, see page 4, lines 16-21 of Applicant’s disclosure and are disclosed for use in the invention and are also expected to meet the limitation of at least 0.02 mol SO2 units per 100 g of the sulfone, see Applicant’s disclosure at page 3, lines 1-5); N-methylpyrrolidone as the solvent (page 13, lines 13-15); Luvitec K90, which is polyvinylpyrrolidone, see Gronwald at page 13, lines 13-15 and page 12, lines 28-30 (which is a water soluble polymer as evidenced in Applicant’s disclosure at page 5, lines 16-17); 1,2-propanediol, which is a C3 alkanediol additive, see Gronwald at page 13, lines 13-15. Gronwald teaches that the solution can include 5-15 wt% of the alkanediol additive (claim 3), 15-25 wt% of the sulfone polymer (page 10, lines 4-5), and 5.9% of PVP, the water-soluble polymer (see Example 1, lines 13-15). Gronwald fails to teach the solvent being N-t-butyl-2-pyrrolidone as the only solvent.
However, Vandeputte teaches that N-t-butyl-2-pyrrolidone can be used as a replacement solvent for N-methylpyrrolidone (abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gronwald’s solution by substituting N-t-butyl-2-pyrrolidone for Gronwald’s single solvent of N-methylpyrrolidone. One would have been motivated to make this modification to utilize a less harmful solvent in the solution as Vandeputte teaches that N-methylpyrrolidone is harmful and known to cause reproductive toxicity (page 2, lines 11-17) and N-t-butyl-2-pyrrolidone has similar solvent properties (page 4, lines 7-11) but is non-reprotoxic (page 5, lines 14-19).
II. Regarding claims 11-15, Gronwald in view of Vandeputte make obvious the solution of claim 4 (see above). Further, Gronwald teaches use of the solution for making a membrane that can be used in a process for separating components in a fluid in an industrial waste water treatment process (page 12, lines 9-21). Gronwald teaches the membrane (page 12, lines 4-7) and the process for making the membrane comprising providing the solution (page 13, lines 12-17) and contacting the solution with water as a coagulant (page 13, lines 19-25). Therefore, Gronwald in view of Vandeputte also make obvious claims 11-15.
Conclusion
Claims 1-17 are pending.
Claims 1-17 are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S WALTERS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/ROBERT S WALTERS JR/
November 22, 2025Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717