Detailed Office 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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
3. Claims 4, 9-11, 14, and 15 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.
Firstly, with respect to claim 4, the language, “the polymer block(s)” (the plural variant thereof) lacks strict antecedence from claim 1.
Secondly, with respect to claim 9, the dependency of the claim on both claim 8 and claim 1 is improper; furthermore, since claim 8 is dependent on claim 1, the reference to claim 1 serves no purpose.
Thirdly, with respect to claim 10, it is unclear what compounds or materials are encompassed by the language, “its derivatives”. The examiner has reviewed the specification; however, no disclosure of what constitutes the derivatives has been provided.
Fourthly, with respect to claims 11 and 15, it is unclear what constitutes “viable cells”; the examiner has reviewed the specification; however, no disclosure of what constitutes viability of the cells has been provided.
Fifthly, with respect to claim 14, it is unclear what constitutes a “predetermined geometry”; without more, it is unclear how “predetermined” is further limiting.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 1-3, 5-8, 12, and 13 are allowed.
5. Claims 4, 9-11, 14, and 15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
6. Claims 1-15 are deemed to be allowable over the prior art, EP 3789424 A1 and US 2019/0153157 A1 being the most relevant prior art. The prior art fails to disclose a copolymer comprising a block of polymerized 2-ethyl-2-oxazoline or 2-methyl-2-oxazoline and a block of polymerized 2-phenethyl-2-oxazoline. While the most relevant prior art discloses polymers of 2-ethyl-2-oxazoline or 2-methyl-2-oxazoline, the most relevant prior art fails to disclose the use/polymerization of 2-phenethyl-2-oxazoline.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rabon A Sergent whose telephone number is (571)272-1079. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM until 5:00 PM, ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Heidi Riviere Kelley, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-1831. The 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 to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/RABON A SERGENT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765