CTNF 18/354,345 CTNF 89069 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-25-01 AIA Applicant’s election without traverse of invention group I, claims 1-10 and 26 , in the reply filed on 02/04/2026 is acknowledged. 08-06 AIA Claim s 11-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/04/2026 . Applicants further elected Nylon 11 as specific filament and acid orange 50 as specific ligand. Claims 1-10 and 26 read on the elected species and are under examination. Claims 1-26 are pending and claims 1-10 and 26 are under examination . Priority Acknowledge is made for priority from US provisional application 63/376,203, filed on 09/19/2022. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/02/2026 is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 For compact prosecution purpose, additional species nylon filaments and reactive dyes are also examined. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim (s) 1-3, 5, 7-10 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1) & (a)(2 ) as being anticipated by Cornero et al. (US20210198308) . The limitation of claims 1-3 and 5 are met by Cornero et al. disclosing a substrate (which is nylon filaments) functionalized with reactive dyes (claims 1 and 5-6). Regarding claims 7-10, this is regarded as inherency of prior art composition. MPEP 2112.01 II, "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Id. MPEP 2112 I, "[T]he discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer." Atlas Powder Co. v. IRECO Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Thus the claiming of a new use, new function or unknown property which is inherently present in the prior art does not necessarily make the claim patentable. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). Regarding claim 26, “an instruction material” is not limiting. Where the only difference between a prior art product and a claimed product is printed matter that is not functionally related to the product, the content of the printed matter will not distinguish the claimed product from the prior art. In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1339, 70 USPQ2d 1862, 1864 (Fed. Cir. 2004). "Where the printed matter is not functionally related to the substrate, the printed matter will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability….[T]he critical question is whether there exists any new and unobvious functional relationship between the printed matter and the substrate." ); In re Miller, 418 F.2d 1392, 1396 (CCPA 1969). MPEP 2112.01. III . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-10 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson et al. (US12516471) in view of Koenig et al. (US4082506) . Determination of the scope and content of the prior art (MPEP 2141.01) Anderson et al. teaches methods of continuously imparting a desired characteristic, optionally color, to a linear polymeric substrate with reliability and reproducibility. According to some aspects, a method of continuously bonding an active agent to or into a polymeric substrate may include contacting an active agent solution with a polymeric substrate. Contacting the active agent solution with the polymeric substrate may occur at a treatment temperature and for a treatment time (abstract). n some aspects, an active agent is suitable to impart color or a change in color to the linear substrate. In some aspects, the active agent is a dye. The dye used to form a colored linear polymer according to particular aspects is optionally an acid dye. An acid dye is optionally an anthraquinone acid dye, an azo acid dye , a triphenylmethane acid dye, or a premetallized acid dye. Illustrative examples of acid dyes include Acid Blue #60, Acid Blue #260 (Blue RL), Acid Blue #9 (Blue FG, CAS #2650-18-2), Acid Blue #25 (Blue GR, CAS #006408-78-2), Acid Blue 1 (CAS #129-17-9), Acid Red #151 ((5Z)-5-[(2-methoxy-5-methyl-4-sulfonatopheny)hydrazinylidene]-6-oxonaphthalene-2-sulfonate), Acid Red #407 (Red 407, CAS #146103-68-6, i.e., Rubine S3G), Acid Red #337, Acid Red #151 (CAS 6406-56-0), Mordant Red 7 (CAS 3618-63-1), Acid Red #1 (i.e., Acid Red G; azophloxine), Acid Red #87 (CAS 548-26-5), Acid Black #2, Acid Yellow #23, Acid Yellow #43 (i.e., Yellow R), Acid Yellow #36 (3-((4-(phenylamino)phenyl)azo)-benzenesulfonicacimonosodium salt), Acid Yellow #232 (CAS 134687-50-6), Acid Orange #144 (i.e., Orange SR 125%; CAS #72797-02-5), Acid Orange #7 (Fast Orange YA, CAS #633-96-5), Acid Black #107 (CAS 12218-96-1), Acid Green 25 (Green G, CAS #4403-90-1), Acid Green 3 (CAS #4680-78-8), Acid Violet #90 (trisodium bis[4-[(4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1-phenyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)azo]-3-hydroxynaphthalene-1-sulphonato(3-)]chromate(3-)), and Acid Violet #17 (i.e., 3-[[4-[[4-(diethylamino)phenyl]-4-[ethyl-[(3-sulfonatophenyl)methyl]azaniumylidene]cyclohexa-2,5-dien-1-ylidene]methyl]-N-ehtylanilino]methyl]benzenesulfonate; Violet Crude, CAS #61916-41-4 (Column 7, line 26-58). A substrate optionally includes or is an outer layer that includes one or more polyamide polymeric materials. Exemplary illustrative examples of a polymeric material include polyamides. In particular aspects, the polymeric material is a polyamide known as nylon. In some particular aspects, the polymeric material is or includes a polyamide. Optionally, a polymer is a homopolymer, a copolymer or a reinforced polymer as long as the polymer includes one or more polyamides. Illustrative examples of a polyamide include nylon 6 nylon 66, nylon 6/6-6, nylon 6/9, nylon 6/10, nylon 6/12, nylon 11 , nylon 12, among others, or any combination thereof (column 8, line 20-33). The systems and methods described herein may be used to impart color or other desired physical or chemical characteristic into a linear polymeric substrate by a process that may include bonding an active agent to or into a linear substrate at a treatment temperature. In some aspects, the treatment time is sufficient to enable the active agent(s) to infuse into the surface or penetrate the surface of the linear polymeric material to a depth of less than 1 millimeter. In some aspects, the treatment time is sufficient to enable the active agents to infuse to the surface or penetrate the surface of the linear polymeric material to a depth of less than 200 microns. Accordingly, in some aspects, the active agents penetrate the surface of the linear polymeric material from 1 micron to 1 millimeter, from 5 microns to 500 microns, from 10 microns to 250 microns, or from 20 microns to 200 microns. In other aspects, the active agents bind to the surface of the linear polymeric substrate, optionally through covalent bonding, hydrogen bonding, ionic bonding , by van der Walls interactions, or combinations thereof (column 11, line 48-67). Koenig et al. teaches A formulation for use in the printing of fabrics or carpets comprising a thickener such as hydroxyalkyl cellulose, an ethylene oxide adduct of a mixture of C 11 to C 15 linear secondary alcohols, a dyestuff and water (abstract). he dyestuffs most frequently used and preferred are the acid or metalized dyes; many of these are known and commercially available and an extensive enumeration thereof is not necessary for one skilled in the art to clearly understand and reproduce the herein claimed invention. Nevertheless, the following specific dyestuffs are identified as suitable for use in this invention, Acid Yellow 151 (C.I. 13906), Acid Orange 60 (C.I. i8732), Acid Orange 50 (C.I. 13150), Acid Red 151 (C.I. 26900), Acid Red 114 (C.I. 23635), Acid Violet 11 (C.I. 17060), Acid Blue 25 (C.I. 62055), Acid Blue 27 (C.I. 61530), Acid Blue 40 (C.I. 62125), Acid Black 52 (C.I. 15711). Any of the known dyes known to be suitable can be used, the above is merely an illustration of a limited number of the most frequently used dyes (column 2, line 15-34). Compositions of this invention were shown to have several advantages. Among the obvious improvements were that dye compatibility, defoaming and screen release were noted. It was also noted that at low pH value, from about 2 to 5, acid dyes showed less of a tendency to precipitate out of the composition. In addition, in the dyeing of nylon substrates, the composition appears to produce clearer and sharper dye prints (column 2, line 57-66). Ascertainment of the difference between the prior art and the claims (MPEP 2141.02) The difference between the instant application and Anderson et al. is that Anderson et al. do not expressly teach Acid orange 50. This deficiency in Anderson et al. is cured by the teachings of Koenig et al. Finding of prima facie obviousness Rational and Motivation (MPEP 2142-2143) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Anderson et al., as suggested by Koenig et al., and produce the instant invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to replace Acid orange 50 for Acid red 151 as dye for Nylon 11 in the composition of Anderson et al. because this is simple substitution of one known dye for another to obtain predictable results. MPEP 2143, it is prima facie obviousness for simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Under guidance from Koenig et al. teaching Acid orange 50 is alternative dye to Acid red 151 for dyeing Nylon, it is obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to replace Acid orange 50 for Acid red 151 as dye for Nylon 11 and produce instant claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success. Regarding claims 1-6, Prior art teaches Nylon 11 treated with Acid orange 50 to impart color or other desired physical or chemical characteristic into a linear polymeric substrate Nylon 11 so Nylon 11 is functionalized with Acid orange 50. Regarding claims 7-10, this is regarded as inherency of prior art composition. MPEP 2112.01 II, "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Id. MPEP 2112 I, "[T]he discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer." Atlas Powder Co. v. IRECO Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Thus the claiming of a new use, new function or unknown property which is inherently present in the prior art does not necessarily make the claim patentable. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). Regarding claim 26, “an instruction material” is not limiting. Where the only difference between a prior art product and a claimed product is printed matter that is not functionally related to the product, the content of the printed matter will not distinguish the claimed product from the prior art. In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1339, 70 USPQ2d 1862, 1864 (Fed. Cir. 2004). "Where the printed matter is not functionally related to the substrate, the printed matter will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability….[T]he critical question is whether there exists any new and unobvious functional relationship between the printed matter and the substrate." ); In re Miller, 418 F.2d 1392, 1396 (CCPA 1969). MPEP 2112.01. III. In light of the forgoing discussion, the Examiner concludes that the subject matter defined by the instant claims would have been obvious within the meaning of 35 USC 103. From the teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, the invention as a whole was prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary . Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 08-34 AIA Claim 1-3, 5, 7-10 and 26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 6251516 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference patent teaches a dye on active substrate (nylon) for capture microdissection (claims 1, 6 and 10), thus, nylon is functionalized with dye. Claims 7-10 are regarded as inherency and instruction material in claim 26 is not limiting, it is obvious to produce applicant’s claimed invention . 08-36 AIA Claim s 1-3, 7-10 and 26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11912740 in view of Cornero et al. (US20210198308). The reference teaches substrate functionalized with reactive dye , in view of Cornero et al. teaching substrate comprising nylon, claims 7-10 are regarded as inherency and instruction material in claim 26 is not limiting, it is obvious to have substrate comprising nylon functionalized with reactive dye and produce applicant’s claimed invention . 08-35 Claim s 1-4, 7-10 and 26 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13, 17 and 20 of copending Application No. 18953424 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference application teaches dye bound to nylon-6, claims 7-10 are regarded as inherency and instruction material in claim 26 is not limiting, it is obvious to produce applicant’s claimed invention . This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. 08-35 Claim s 1-3, 5-10 and 26 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13, 16, 18-20 of copending Application No. 118406908 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference application teaches dye (Acid orange 50) bound to nylon filament, claims 7-10 are regarded as inherency and instruction material in claim 26 is not limiting, it is obvious to produce applicant’s claimed invention . This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Conclusion No claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIANFENG SONG. Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1978. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Brian-Yong Kwon can be reached at (571)272-0581. 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. /JIANFENG SONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 2 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 3 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 4 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 5 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 6 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 7 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 8 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 9 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 10 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 11 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 12 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 13 Art Unit: 1613 Application/Control Number: 18/354,345 Page 14 Art Unit: 1613