DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s reply, filed 19 May 2026 in response to the requirement for restriction mailed 24 March 2026, has been fully considered. As per Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-9 are pending under examination and claims 10-15 are withdrawn (see below).
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-9, in the reply filed on 19 May 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 10-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 19 May 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoneyama (US PGPub 2009/0178589) in view of Izu et al. (US PGPub 2010/0015188).
Regarding claims 1-2 and 7, Yoneyama teaches fine inorganic oxide particles which have been surface treated with an organosilane (see formula (I)/(II) at [0048]-[0049]; instant multifunctional silane compound) in combination with a fluorine-containing silane coupling agent (see formula (1)/(2) at [0055]-[0058]; instant fluorine-containing silane compound), wherein the fluorine-containing silane coupling agent is bonded to the surface of the inorganic oxide particles through hydrolysis and/or condensation of the organosilane compound ([0062]), resulting in improved stability and dispersability of the inorganic oxide particles ([0060]-[0062]; [0051]-[0052]). Yoneyama further teaches the inorganic oxide particles have an average particle size of 5 to 100 nm ([0082]) and include cerium oxide ([0080]-[0081]).
Yoneyama teaches the method of surface treating the inorganic oxide particles by combining the particles with organosilane in the presence of water, or other solvents ([0063]), and an acid catalyst and/or metal chelate ([0035]) where the combined use of the orgnaosilane and a fluorine-containing silane ([0052]; [0060]-[0062]) to treat the inorganic oxide is preferred as such will effectively improve particle dispersability ([0052]).
Yoneyama teaches obtaining dispersions of the treated inorganic oxide particles and does not specifically teach either use of a cerium precursor or precipitation of the particles by addition of basic solution (claims 1 and 7) and drying (claim 2). However, Izu teaches methods of obtaining nanosized cerium oxide particles which have been surface modified by a polymeric material (abstract; [0013]-[0014]; [0017]). Izu teaches that the so-produced particles can be in the form of a powder or a dispersion ([0019]; [0021]; [0041]-[0042]) and that powders are readily redispersed ([0022]) and teaches dispersion mediums including water ([0023]). Izu teaches that heating the ceria compound and polymer under reflux is generally suitable for precipitating the modified particles ([0028]-[0030]) which are easily dried to obtain powders (examples), and further teaches that addition of sodium hydroxide or ammonia to the reaction dispersion is also a known method which results in precipitation of the oxide particle ([0045]). Additionally, Izu teaches it is preferred and suitable to use an inexpensive cerium nitrate salt as a starting material instead of cerium oxide or alkoxide as such is more expensive ([0013]; [0043]). Izu and Yoneyama are analogous art and are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely dispersible surface modified cerium oxide nanoparticles suitable for use in films. At the time of filing a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use the ceria salt starting materials and precipitation methods of Izu in the method of Yoneyama and would have been motivated to do so as Izu teaches ceria salts are an inexpensive alternative known to be suitable, that precipitation by sodium hydroxide or ammonia is a known alternative to precipitation via heat treatment in forming the particles, and that readily redispersible powders are readily obtained.
Regarding claims 3-6, Yoneyama in view of Izu renders obvious the method as set forth above. Yoneyama further teaches fluorine-containing silane coupling agents ([0051]; [0054]-[0057]) readable over the instantly claimed (claim 3) and teaches organosilane compounds readable over the instantly claimed trifunctional silane (claim 4) and trialkoxysilane (claim 5) as claimed. As claim 6 is further limiting to a non-positively recited optional alternative, the claim is deemed met.
Regarding claims 8-9, Yoneyama in view of Izu renders obvious the method as set forth above. Yoneyama further teaches the organosilane compounds and the fluorine-containing silane are present in a ratio of 99:1 to 1:99 ([0060]). Yoneyama further exemplifies amounts of inorganic oxide (examples; Table3, approx52.6%) readable over the instant range and Izu renders obvious use of ceria salt precursor materials instead (see above).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANE L STANLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3870. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM to 3:30 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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at 571-272-1197. 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.
/JANE L STANLEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767
Prosecution Insights