DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
2. The Applicants submitted claim amendments on 6/2/2026 in response to the office action mailed on 3/3/2026. The status of the claims are as follows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by (US 2018/0289593 A1) to Chen et al. (hereinafter Chen).
The above noted rejection is withdrawn.
4. Claims 1 and 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by (JP 2019-112343 A) to Sakamoto et al. (hereinafter Sakamoto).
The above noted rejection is withdrawn.
NEW Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US 2018/0289593 A1) to Chen et al. (hereinafter Chen) in view of the teachings of (US 11,325,993 B1) to Fukudome (hereinafter Fukudome).
Chen is directed toward dental compositions. Chen discloses at paragraph [0007] that the dental composition is a polymerizable monomer, a thiourea and copper, a 4th period element, as a catalyst. Chen discloses at paragraph [0008] that the thiourea compound includes a 1-(2-Tetrahydrofurfuryl)-2-thiourea, which reads on Applicants formula (1). Chen discloses at paragraph [0046] that the composition may include a tertiary amine. Chen discloses at paragraph [0007] that the 1-Benzoyl-2-thiourea compound reads on the Applicants aromatic thiourea compound. Chen discloses at paragraph [0046] that dialkylaminobenzoic compounds are disclosed. Chen discloses at paragraph [0007] that the composition is used in dental cements. Chen discloses at paragraph [0008] that polymerizable monomers that contain acidic groups are disclosed. Chen discloses a thiourea initiator, but is silent regarding the specific species.
Fukudome is directed toward dental compositions. Chen and Fukudome are both directed toward dental compositions and therefore are analogous art. Fukudome teaches at (C4, L60) a thiourea compound used as an initiator:
PNG
media_image1.png
263
431
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
196
437
media_image2.png
Greyscale
One skilled in the art would find it obvious to use the thiourea compound of Fukudone as an initiator for a dental adhesive, which is functionally equivalent.
It would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the filing of the disclosure of Chen in view of the teachings of Fukudome that teaches each and every element as arranged in claims and forms a prime facie case of obviousness for claims 1-4 and 6-7.
8. Claims 1 and 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP 2019-112343 A) to Sakamoto et al. (hereinafter Sakamoto). in view of the teachings of (US 11,325,993 B1) to Fukudome (hereinafter Fukudome).
Sakamoto is directed toward dental compositions. Sakamoto discloses in paragraph [0008] that a dental composition comprising a methacrylate monomer, a photopolymerization initiator, a vanadium compound and a thiourea. Sakamoto discloses in paragraph [0035] that a thiourea that includes a trialkylthiourea of trimethylthiourea may be used. Sakamoto discloses a thiourea initiator, but is silent regarding the specific species.
Fukudome is directed toward dental compositions. Chen and Fukudome are both directed toward dental compositions and therefore are analogous art. Fukudome teaches at (C4, L60) a thiourea compound used as an initiator:
PNG
media_image1.png
263
431
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
196
437
media_image2.png
Greyscale
One skilled in the art would find it obvious to use the thiourea compound of Fukudone as an initiator for a dental adhesive, which is functionally equivalent.
It would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the filing of the disclosure of Sakamoto in view of the teachings of Fukudome that teaches each and every element as arranged in claims and forms a prime facie case of obviousness for claims 1 and 3-7.
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
10. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
11. 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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY D WASHVILLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3262. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
13. 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.
14. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at 571-272-1302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
15. 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.
/JEFFREY D WASHVILLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights