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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Objections Claims 38 and 50 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 38 has a typographical error, the word “alky” in line 1 of the claim should be “alkyl”. Claim 50 has the limitation “step vi.” i n line 1, but there are only three steps in claim 49, from which it depends; examiner presumes the claim should read “step iv.” 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 31-50 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 FILLIN "Enter claim identification information" \* MERGEFORMAT 31 , the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Examiner questions if the measurement conditions are confined to solutions conforming to these limits or may the reactive diluent be dissolved in any solvent at any pH? For the purposes of evaluating the claims against the prior art, the example of acetone and a pH of 7 is treated as not required by the claim, and that any solvent may be used for the measurement of the absorption maximum . This is based on page 4 line 12 of the instant specification where applicant states “when dissolved in a solvent,” followed by an example of acetone at pH 7, which clearly does not limit the solvent to only acetone. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 32-50 are rejected under 112b due to their dependency on claim 31. 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. Claim s 31 , 34, 39-45 , 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 FILLIN "Insert either \“(a)(1)\” or \“(a)(2)\” or both. If paragraph (a)(2) of 35 U.S.C. 102 is applicable, use form paragraph 7.15.01.aia, 7.15.02.aia or 7.15.03.aia where applicable." \d "[ 2 ]" (a)(1) as being FILLIN "Insert either—clearly anticipated—or—anticipated—with an explanation at the end of the paragraph." \d "[ 3 ]" anticipated by Barker et al, "A microstereolithography resin based on thiol- ene chemistry: towards biocompatible 3D extracellular constructs for tissue engineering", Biomaterial Science, April 2014, pages 472-475, Vol. 2, No. 4 (included with applicant’s IDS) as evidenced by Claudino et al, “Thiol- ene coupling of 1,2-disubstituted alkene monomers: The kinetic effect of cis/trans-isomer structures” and as evidenced by “Paprika Oleoresin” specification prepared by the World Health Organization. Regarding claims 31, 39-41, 44-45 , Barker teaches a resin composition comprising an allyl-functional polycarbonate, page 2 right column, structure shown below, which reads on the claimed prepolymer. The polycarbonate also comprises repeat units with unsaturated side chains and carbonate linkages, which reads on claims 39 and 40, and has the general formula (ii) of claim 41. The resin composition further comprises thiol pentaerythritol tetrakis (3-mercaptopropionate) as a crosslinker, page 3 left column second paragraph, which also reads on claims 44 and 45. The photoinhibitor oleore s in paprika is also included , which has a max absorption of 470nm in hexane as evidenced by the Paprika Oleoresin Specification by the W orld Health Organization, page 3. Barker does not explicitly call the dye a reactive diluent, but it reads on the claimed reactive diluent because a diluent is any chemical that reduces the concentration of other chemicals in a mixture. Furthermore, according to applicant’s definition on page 4 of the instant specification “ the reactive diluent contains a functional group that is capable of reacting with a functional group on the prepolymer and/or the crosslinker to result in a chemical bond, e.g. an ionic bond or a covalent bond, preferably a covalent bond ” and although Barker is silent as to the reactivity of the dye with the prepolymer or crosslinker, the skilled artisan is reasonably suggested that the dye is capable of reacting with the thiol crosslinker as evidenced by Claudino et al, which shows on page 3 figure 1 a generalized mechanism proposed for thiol- ene coupling reaction involving an internal ene . The oleoresin paprika dye contains the compounds capsaicin, capsanthin, and capsorubin , also shown on pages 2-3 of the WHO document, all of which contain internal ene functionality. Therefore the oleoresin paprika dye anticipates the claimed reactive diluent with a max absorption between 350-520nm. Regarding claim 34, the oleoresin paprika contains the three compounds capsaicin, capsanthin, and capsorubin , which have molecular weights of 305.40 g/mol, 584.85 g/mol, and 600.85 g/mol, according to the WHO document. The relative molecular mass of each is less than 1000, which is calculated as 305.4/12 = 25.45, 584.85/12= 48.74, and 600.85/12= 50.07, satisfying option (i) of claim 34. Regarding claim 42 , Barker teaches the composition further comprises a viscosity modifier and a photoinitiator Irgacure 784, page 3 right column first paragraph. Regarding claim 43 , Barker states the crosslinker and polycarbonate are in a 1:1 molar ratio, page 3 left column, and the viscosity modifier is in an amount of 10 wt.%, the Irgacure 784 at 0.5 wt.% and the oleoresin paprika at 0.25 wt.%, page 3 right column. The initiator and oleoresin paprika extract fall within the claimed ranges. Subtracting from 100%, there is 90.25 wt.% remaining for both prepolymer and crosslinker . The polycarbonate is 5,870 g/mol, page 3 left column first paragraph, and the crosslinker has a molecular weight of 488.64 g/mol. A 1:1 mole ratio is about a 12:1 weight ratio of polycarbonate to crosslinker. Therefore out of the remaining 90.25 wt.%, about 6.94 wt.% is the crosslinker, and about 83.3 wt.% is the polycarbonate prepolymer, both of which fall within the claimed ranges. Regarding claim 49, Barker teaches a method of fabricating a crosslinked polymer comprising the composition of claim 31, and further comprising an initiator, Irgacure 784, and providing and energy source to activate the initiator , page 3 right column first paragraph. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 32- 33, 35-38, 46-48, and 50 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not teach, disclose, or suggest the reactive diluent comprises a cyclic urea or a reactive diluent that matches the structures claimed in claims 32-33 and 35-38. The cited prior art also does not teach making a shape memory material, the resin of Barker is for 3D scaffolding to be used in the body, but there is no suggestion it can act as a SMP. Applicant states that the urea or urethane linkages in the reactive diluent are necessary for the SMP behavior, therefore it would not be inherent in Barker’s tissue scaffolding. Barker does teach the resin is degradable, but because claim 47 depends from claim 46, it is allowable, as is claim 48 . Barker doesn’t teach claim 50 because the reactive diluent does not have an unsaturated side chain. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT VIRGINIA L STONEHOCKER whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-3431 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 7:00AM-4:00PM 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Randy Gulakowski can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-1302 . 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. /V.L.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 1766 /MARC S ZIMMER/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1765