DETAILED ACTION
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 .
This action is in response to Applicant’s response to election/restriction filed 03/09/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 03/09/2026 is acknowledged. The grounds for the traversal is unclear. Applicant alludes to arguments made; however, there are no arguments that distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 11-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 03/09/2026.
Claims 1-16 are pending. Claims 1-10 are being examined. Claims 11-16 are withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: typographical error, “catalys” should be “catalyst”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-10 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.
Considering claim 1, it appears that Applicant is reciting a list of alternatively useable members; treatment of claims reciting alternatives maybe through Markush grouping which requires selection from a closed group “consisting of” the alternative members using “and” language; other formats such as “wherein the material is A, B, or C” may be used. However, Applicant is using “and” and “or” language to recite alternatives and it is unclear as to group of alternatives the composition is selected from.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 –
(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.
Claims 1, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Theodoridis (Theodoridis et al., “The role of positively charged meso-substituents on the kinetics of the reductive nitrosylation of iron(III)-porphyrins The catalytic role of nitrite”, Journal of Molecular Catalysis A: Chemical 224 (2004) 197-205).
Considering claims 1, 6 and 8, Theodoridis teaches an iron porphyrin catalyst with the structure of formula I wherein R1, R2, R3, and R4 are TM4PyP (Theodoridis, Fig. 1).
Claims 1, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moreira (Theodoridis et al., “Moreira, M. S. M. et al., "Iron porphyrins immobilized on silica surface and encapsulated in silica matrix: a comparison of their catalytic activity in hydrocarbon oxidation”, Journal of Molecular Catalysis A: Chemical 233 (2005) 73-81).
Considering claims 1, 6 and 8, Moreira teaches an iron porphyrin catalyst with the structure of formula I wherein R1, R2, R3, and R4 are TM4PyP (Moreira, Fig. 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANITA NASSIRI-MOTLAGH whose telephone number is (571)270-7588. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-3:00.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/ANITA NASSIRI-MOTLAGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights