DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application
This action is responsive to national-stage application filed 06/09/2023. The concurrently filed preliminary amendment is acknowledged. Amended claims 1-11 are currently pending and under examination herein.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement(s)
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) accompanying the application papers is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609, and therefore the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits. An initialed copy of the IDS is included with the mailing/transmittal of this Office action.
Foreign Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Objection – Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the profile lines of the LAC chromatograms depicted in Figs. 6-9 are not of sufficient darkness and weight to permit adequate reproduction. See 37 CFR 1.84(l). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required for said figures 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.
Objection – Claims
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: referring to the penultimate line, “Phase” should read –phase-- (lower case “p”) so as to agree with the first occurrence of “organic phase” therein (cf., line 7). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 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 1, the expressions “polymerizing monomers … up to a minimum conversion rate of 80%,” “polymerize … the monomers up to a minimum conversion rate of 95%” and “polymerization up to a minimum mass conversion of 99%” (see lines 18-19, 26-27 and 29) create indefiniteness in that “up to” is normally used to introduce a value representing an upper endpoint of a range; whereas the subsequent recital of “minimum” signifies just the opposite, i.e., that the specified conversion rate values reflect lower endpoints that may permissibly be exceeded without falling outside the ambit of claimed Steps 1 and 2. Assuming the conversion rates specified in the respective expressions are in fact intended to denote minimum degrees of polymerization, this ground of rejection may be obviated by deleting “up” from each expression (e.g., “polymerizing monomers … [[up]] to a minimum conversion rate of 80%”). Dependent claims 2-11 are subsumed in this ground of rejection.
Regarding Claim 3, the limiting significance of “or not” in the expression “alkyl radical which is linear or non-functionalized or not …” is ambiguous, rendering the claim indefinite. Specifically, it is not clear whether “or not” is intended to negate one or both of the antecedent selections “linear or functionalized”. That is, whether the alkyl radical can be not “non-functionalized” (implying a functionalized radical), or not “linear” (implying a branched radical), or both. As the claim is now drafted, the presence of “or not” causes confusion as to the scope of claimed subject matter.
Regarding Claim 11, the claim provides the limitation to “adding the beads as claimed in claim 10”. There is inadequate antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim nor in parent claim 10, as the latter is drawn to “[a] bead” as a singular product obtained from the process of claim 1. This ground of rejection may be obviated by amending claim 11 to depend directly from claim 1, as by reciting “adding the beads obtained from the process of claim [[10]] 1”.
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Inoubli et al (US 2017/0369622 A1) is cited as of interest regarding use of a water-soluble block copolymer, specifically a diblock P(BA-MPEGMA)-b-P(BA-S-MAA) copolymer, as a support material for 3D printing (note Example 1). A first step of polymerizing the BA-MPEGMA block utilizes reagents including BlocBuilder® which corresponds to instant formula [Chem 10]), but proceeds as a bulk polymerization; only the second step is performed in the solvent process. In addition, the citation does not contemplate the addition of mercaptan(s) and the obtained product is not in the form of beads as in the present invention.
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 would be allowable if amended or rewritten to overcome the objection (re: claim 1) and rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Pending claims are deemed to distinguish over the closest prior art as represented by Ballard, et al, Magnet, et al (US 2010/0261832 A1) and Carsten, et al.
Ballard, et al disclose nitroxide-mediated suspension polymerization of methacrylic monomers in the presence of the alkoxyamine 3-(((2-cyanopropan-2-yl)oxy)(cyclohexyl)amino)-2,2-dimethyl-3-phenylpropanenitrile and the formation of block polymers (p. 657, section 2.4 and Table 1). However, Ballard, et al fail to disclose a block comprising an acrylic and/or styrenic monomer or the use of a mercaptan in a second step; further, the aforementioned alkoxyamine is not an alkoxyamine bearing a nitroxide corresponding to claimed formula [Chem 10] herein.
Magnet, et al disclose a method for emulsion preparation of a PMMA-PBA-PMMA block copolymer latex in which the PBA block is produced by emulsion polymerization of the BA in the presence of an alkoxyamine to a conversion of 70% ([0255]-[0258]: 1st stage/2nd stage), the residual monomer is polymerized by conventional free radical polymerization in the presence of a mercaptan, the MMA is added and polymerized to a conversion of 86%, then the residual MMA is polymerized by conventional free radical polymerization in the presence of a mercaptan ([0259]-[0264]: 3rd stage – 5th stage). The composition obtained comprises the block polymer of the PMMA and the PBA. However, Magnet, et al fail to disclose suspension polymerization, conversion of the BA at the end of the first step to a minimum mass conversion rate of 80%, or the addition of the mercaptan at the start of step 2. In addition, the composition obtained is not in the form of “beads” as in the present invention (cf., claim 1, ll. 2-3 and claims 10-11).
Carsten, et al disclose suspension polymerization of methacrylic monomers in the presence of TEMPO and the formation of polystyrene-b-poly(styrene-co-butyl methacrylate) block copolymers as hard pearls following separation from the suspension medium and washing in warm methanol solution (p. 27, final two paras of right-hand column). However, the first step of polymerizing the styrene is a bulk polymerization step; only the second step is an aqueous suspension polymerization step. In addition, TEMPO is not an alkoxyamine bearing a nitroxide corresponding to claimed formula [Chem 10] herein, the disclosed method does not use mercaptan and the second step does not comprise the addition of a water-soluble initiator to polymerize the residual monomers by forming a shell on the pearls (i.e., beads; cf. [0081] of Subst. Spec.).
Furthermore, the Applicant’s comparative data (see Figs. 1-5 and [0037] – [0041] of Subst. Spec.) show that the presence of mercaptans at the start of the second step allows for the conversion to be accelerated and for more thermally stable products to be obtained. Neither Ballard, et al nor Magnet et al, discussed above, provide proper rationale for modifying the method of Carsten, et al so as to arrive at the presently claimed method or the products obtained thereby.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Examiner F. M. Teskin whose telephone number is (571) 272-1116. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM.
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, Robert Jones, can be reached at (571) 270-7733. The appropriate fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/FRED M TESKIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762
/FMTeskin/02-03-26