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
Status of Application
1. Applicants’ arguments/remarks filed 2 March 2026 are acknowledged. Claims 1-2, 7, 16, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 37, 40, 44-45, 50, 54-55, 59, and 71 are currently pending. Claims 1-2, 59, and 71 are amended. Claims 3-6, 8-15, 17-21, 23-24, 26-27, 29-30, 32-33, 35-36, 38-39, 41-43, 46-49, 51-53, 56-58, and 60-70 are cancelled. Claims 1-2, 7, 16, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 37, 40, 44-45, 50, 54-55, 59, and 71 are examined on the merits within.
Withdrawn Rejections
2. Applicants’ arguments, filed 2 March 2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) Rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) Rejections of claims 7, 16, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 37, 40, 44, 50, 54, 59, and 71 have been withdrawn. The 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) Rejections of claims 1-2 have been withdrawn in view of applicants’ arguments.
Maintained Rejections
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-2, 7, 16, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 37, 40, 44-45, 50, 54-55, 59, and 71 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hajime (BR102012030667) in view of Gebhardt et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,847,097).
Hajime teach Saflufenacil. See Table 1.
Hajime do not teach adding saflufenacil to solvent followed by addition of a base.
Gebhardt et al. teach a process for making a phenyluracil or herbicidally acceptable salt thereof. See claim 1. The reaction is carried out in an aqueous/organic multiphase system. See claim 8. The aqueous phase is a solution of at least on alkali metal or alkaline earth metal hydroxide, carbonate, or bicarbonate. See claim 10. Suitable bases include sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide, sodium carbonate, potassium carbonate and sodium bicarbonate. See column 13, lines 4-10. Solvents include toluene, chlorobenzene, methanol, etc. See column 10, lines 63-67 and column 11, lines 1-18. Acid addition salts can be achieved through the use of chlorides. See column 3, lines 30-35.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to use a solvent and base to formulate the potassium or sodium salt of Saflufenacil because using solvents such as chlorobenzene, toluene, and methanol and bases such as sodium or potassium hydroxide are known to be used in reactions to form similar solid herbicidal compounds with a phenyluracil structure. It would have been well within the purview of the skilled artisan to add hydrochloric acid to the process in the conversion of the final product because Gebhardt et al. teach the use of both acids and bases in conversion of phenyluracils to arrive at a desired salt form. It would have been expected for the salt form of Saflufenacil to have the same properties when analyzed under X-ray powder diffraction.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed 2 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
5. Applicants argued, “Hajime does not teach a solid form of Saflufenacil potassium salt. Gebhardt does not remedy the defect.”
In response to applicants’ arguments, Hajime teaches that the compound Saflufenacil is a known herbicide. See page 2. Gebhardt teaches a method of making a salt of phenyluracil, a herbicide with a structurally similar core to Saflufenacil. Thus it would have been obvious to use the methods of Gebhardt to arrive at the claimed salt because Gebhardt teaches conversion of solid herbicidal compounds with a similar phenyluracil structure.
Thus this rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
6. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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
7. No claims are allowed at this time.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA WORSHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7434. 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, Robert Wax can be reached at 571-272-0623. 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.
/JESSICA WORSHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1615
Prosecution Insights