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 .
A request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/4/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-18 are pending in this application.
Restriction/Election of record
The restriction requirement of 6/10/2025 is repeated in this RCE and Applicant’s 7/28/2025 election of Group I continue to apply in this RCE. It is noted that the Examiner combined Group I and Group III, based on the amendment to the claims filed on 7/28/2025; that is to say, restriction between Group I and III was withdrawn in the Office action of 11/3/2025.
Accordingly, claims 8-12 remain withdrawn from further consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. Applicant is requested to expedite prosecution by cancelling the non-elected claims. Claims 1-7 and 13-18 will presently be examined.
Withdrawn ground of rejection
The outstanding ground of rejection of claims 13-18 under 35 USC 112(a) or 35 USC 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, is withdrawn in view of deletion of the “synergistically constructing” in claim 13 in the amendment filed on 8/4/2026.
The outstanding ground of rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 USC 112(b) or 35 USC 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, is withdrawn in view of the amendment to claim 1 filed on 8/4/2026. However, Applicant is advised that the rejection of claims 13-18 is maintained.
The outstanding ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, is withdrawn in view of amendment to claim 13 filed on 8/4/2026. Applicant is however advised of a new ground under the same statute is set forth hereinbelow.
35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph
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 13-18 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.
Upon further review and reconsideration of claim 13, the following indefiniteness issues are noted.
In claim 13, there is no precise antecedent basis for “the antibacterial and
antiviral nanoparticles” (emphases added). Independent claim 1, from which claim 13 depends, recites “nano-binder particles.” Upon further review, it is now recognized that “nanoparticles” is a description of particles having nano-size, whereas nano-binder particles could be a description of particles that has nano-binders. In other words, nano-binder particles are open to the interpretation that the particles themselves are not necessarily nano-sized.
(2) Claim 13 recites “the content of the binder component is 0.01 wt% to 5 wt%
based on the weight of the second mixture,” as shown below (emphasis added). The problem with this language is that step (a) and step (c) each require a separate binder component. Therefore, “the binder component” is ambiguous for failing to distinguish which binder is being referenced, the binder of step (a), the binder of step (c), or mixture of all the binders from steps (a) and (c).
PNG
media_image1.png
90
638
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(3) In claim 13, “the nano-binder particles” do not correspond to the previous recitation of binders, which were not characterized as nano. It is confusing how the binders became “nano-binder particles” near the end of claim 13:
PNG
media_image2.png
304
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(4) The sentence structure of claim 13 is confusing. The structural problem of claim 13 can be seen below in the following condensed version of claim 13:
13. The … fabric of claim 3, wherein the… nanoparticles are made by
step (a) …
step (b) …
step (c) …
…
wherein the nano-binder particles comprise … zinc oxide, to construct a three-dimensional nanonetwork.
It is unclear how the last infinitive phrase, “to construct a three-dimensional nanonetwork” modifies the claim. Is it another process step, which would be incomplete then, or is it merely a statement of intended use? Rephrasing or deletion is suggested
(5) It was noted in the Office action of 5/8/2026 that “nanonetwork” in claim 13 is indefinite language. One skilled in the art would not be able to determine what exactly is a three-dimensional nanonetwork and what is not such a nanonetwork. For example, is the network itself nanosized or is the network made up of nanosized particles? Clarifying language is needed.
Dependent claims are included in this ground of rejection because they do not cure the deficiencies of their base claim(s).
35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
It is recognized now that claims 14-18 are directed to “The method of claim 13,” but claim 13 is actually directed to a fabric. In other words, claims 14-18 fail to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable claims
Claims 1-7 are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JOHN PAK whose telephone number is (571)272-0620. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:30 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's SPE, Fereydoun Sajjadi, can be reached on (571)272-3311. 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 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).
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.
/JOHN PAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1699
Prosecution Insights