DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-2 and 4-20 are pending in the instant application. Claims 11-20 have been withdrawn based upon Restriction/Election. Claims 1-2 and 4-10 are being examined on the merits in the instant application.
Advisory Notice
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
All rejections and/or objections not explicitly maintained in the instant office action have been withdrawn per Applicants’ claim amendments and/or persuasive arguments.
Priority
The U.S. effective filing date has been determined to be 01/23/2023, the filing date of the U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/440,510.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 02/20/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the first office action on the merits, however Applicant has indicated the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) has been submitted. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the Examiner.
Substitute Specification
Applicant states that: “Applicant respectfully requests entry of the above amendments to the Specification and Claims. Marked-Up and Clean versions of the Second Substitute Specification are submitted herewith.”
The examiner sees no “Marked-Up and Clean versions of the Second Substitute Specification” filed on 03/17/2026. Applicant should verify copies are of record, and correct if desired.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roy et al.1 (“Electrosynthesis of pyrrole 3-carboxylic acid copolymer films and nanotubes with tunable degree of functionalization for biomedical applications,” 2011; Electrochimica Acta, Vol. 56, pp. 3641-3648) in view of BACKES (WO 2021/122055 A1; published June, 2021; U.S. 2023/0057908 A1, relied on as an English language translation, and cited herein); Su et al. (“Fabrication and characterization of collagen-heparin-polypyrrole composite conductive film for neural scaffold,” 2019, ELSEVIER; International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, Vol. 129, pp. 895–903); Kim et al. (“Fabrication and characterization of conductive polypyrrole thin film prepared by in situ vapor-phase polymerization,”2003, ELSEVIER, Synthetic Metals, Vol. 132, pp. 309-313) and DOMB (US 2006/0013850; published January, 2006).
Applicants Claims
A conductive film comprising a heparin modified polymer, the heparin modified polymer comprising heparin covalently bound to a conjugated backbone of a polymer reaction product of a beta-substituted monomer co-polymerized to its non-functionalized pair, wherein the beta-substituted monomer is selected from the group consisting of pyrrole, […], and the beta-substituted monomer is beta-substituted with one or more of an amine functional moiety, an carboxylic acid functional moiety, an alcohol functional moiety, or an anhydride functional moiety, and wherein its non-functionalized pair comprises a non-functionalized monomer selected from the group consisting of a non-functionalized pyrrole […].”(instant claim 1). Applicant further claims the non-functionalized monomer is present in an amount in a range of 30 wt.% to 40 wt.% of the polymer reaction product (instant claim 6), the conductive film has a thickness in a range of from 50 nm to 100 μm (instant claim 8), and the heparin-modified polymer has a conductivity in a range of from 2 S/cm to 10 S/cm (instant claim 9). Applicant further claims a medical device having a coating comprising the conductive film of claim 1 (instant claim 10), elected species of medical device being a catheter.
Elected Species: Applicants have elected the following species in the reply filed 11/18/2025: (a) a species of a beta-substituted monomer having a conjugated backbone that is co-polymerized to its non-functionalized pair with specificity to: (i) the beta-substituted monomer, and (ii) the non-functionalized pair is (i) polypyrrole and (ii) pyrrole; and (b) a species of medical device having a coating comprising the conductive polymer of claim 1 is a catheter.
Determination of the scope
and content of the prior art (MPEP 2141.01)
Roy et al. teaches electrosynthesis of pyrrole 3-carboxylic acid copolymer films and nanotubes with tunable degree of functionalization for biomedical applications (title, see whole document), particularly “Tailoring polypyrrole (PPy), an electroactive polymer, with functional groups to which a variety of bioactive molecules can be tethered is highly attractive for building biological structures on conducting surfaces for a range of biomedical applications. In this respect, we investigate the effects of three independent electrosynthesis parameters, namely the applied potential, the composition of the comonomer solution and the film thickness on the incorporation of carboxylic acid-functionalized pyrrole units (Py-COOH) into polypyrrole/Py-COOH copolymer films.” (abstract). Roy et al. teaches the structure of their proposed reaction product (p. 3646, Figure 5) which includes beta-substituted to NH-PEG through the carboxylic acid group.
Roy et al. teaches the Py-COOH comonomer/mol % (Figure 2), encompassing the range of 30 to 40%, and that: “Fig. 2b presents the plot of the absorbance intensity at 1700cm−1 versus the molar percentage of Py-COOH in the comonomer solution after overoxidation correction (the value corresponding to the overoxidation of PPY at 0.7V was subtracted from the obtained absorbance values for the copolymer films). At this electrosynthesis potential, it appears that the incorporation of Py-COOH units in the copolymer is strongly affected by the composition of the comonomer solution. The same trend than the one reported for the N-substituted pyrrole copolymers was observed, an increase of Py-COOH units in the copolymer when the molar percentage of Py-COOH is increased in the comonomer electrosynthesis solution.” (p. 3644, col. 1, §3.1.3). Roy et al. does not expressly disclose the weight percentage of the non-functionalized polypyrrole monomer present in conductive film, however, it would have been prima facie obvious to optimize the amount of Py-COOH in the film per the range disclosed in Figure 2 of Roy et al. (MPEP §2144.05(II)).
Roy et al. further teaches that: “The electropolymerization process was then combined with the template method for preparing Py-co-Py-COOH copolymer nanotubes that present potential applications in drug delivery. For that purpose, the outer surface of the functionalized nanotubes was further successfully modified by covalently immobilizing PEG chains in order to enhance their antifouling properties. The PPy-based conductive platforms (Py-co-Py-COOH copolymer films and nanotubes) developed here provide functional surfaces capable of tethering various biomolecules, such as antibodies, enzymes, and growth factors, and can therefore find applications in numerous biomedical applications going from bioelectronics to tissue engineering. Some of these potentialities are currently under investigation.” (p. 4, §Conclusions).
Ascertainment of the difference between
the prior art and the claims (MPEP 2141.02)
The difference between the rejected claims and the teachings of Roy et al. is that Roy et al. does not expressly teach: (1) heparin covalently bound to a conjugated backbone of a polymer reaction product of a beta-substituted monomer, (2) the film thickness, or (3) the conductivity or the use as a catheter coating.
BACKES teaches conductive nanocomposites which can be functionalized (title, see whole document). BACKES teaches that: “The conductive ligand therefore preferably comprises a conductive polymer. These are polymers having a conjugated pi system as the backbone.” ([0018]). And that: “Such conductive polymers are for example was based on pyrrole such as polypyrrole, poly(N-substituted pyrrole), poly(3-substituted pyrrole) and poly(3,4-substituted pyrrole); […].” ([0019]).
BACKES teaches that: “For the reaction it may be necessary to activate the carboxyl group. Methods therefor, for example reaction with EDC (l -ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide hydrochloride) or NHS (N-hydroxysuccinimide ), are known to those skilled in the art and are standard for functionalization in biochemistry.” [emphasis added] ([0036]). And that: “This makes it possible for the composition according to the invention to be functionalized in a very wide variety of ways.” ([0037]). And that: “Examples of such functionalizations are polymers, oligomers, peptides, proteins, antibodies, cells, oligonucleotides from DNA, RNA or analogs thereof, polysaccharides or glycosamines.” [emphasis added] ([0038]). And further that: “The polysaccharides or glycosamines may be cellulose or heparin.” [emphasis added]([0041]).
Su et al. discloses fabrication and characterization of collagen-heparin-polypyrrole composite conductive film for neural scaffold (title, see whole document). Su et al. teaches that: “In this work, a conductive film consisted of polypyrrole-heparin-collagen (PHC film) was fabricated as a potential neural scaffold. Heparin was initially modified with pyrrole, which was further polymerized with pyrrole monomer under the catalysis of ferric trichloride. Then collagen was added and crosslinked through amide bond, as well as physical interaction with pyrrole through hydrogen bond. In this system, heparin and collagen contributed to improving the biocompatibility, because they were the major component of the extracellular matrix. Additionally, heparin was verified to promote nerve cells growth.” (abstract).
Su et al. discloses the Schematic representation of polypyrrole/heparin/collage composite film in Figure 1 (p. 896), including heparin covalently bonded to the polypyrrole through an amine functional moiety (instant claims 1-5). Su et al. discloses that the heparin used was “Heparin sodium (Mw: 6–20 KDa)” (p. 896, col. 2, last paragraph)(instant claim 7).
Kim et al. teaches fabrication and characterization of conductive polypyrrole thin film prepared in situ vapor-phase polymerization (title, see whole document), and particularly that: “The conductive thin films of ferric chloride doped polypyrrole (PPy) were obtained by in situ vapor-phase polymerization method under ambient conditions. Homogeneous and thin conductive PPy films were uniformly fabricated at a nano-level thickness on the plastic film substrates by continuous roll process. The conductivity of the films typically 600 nm thick rapidly increases with the increasing deposition time of the pyrrole monomer (up to 6 x 102 S/cm).” (abstract).
Kim et al. teaches that: “The thickness of the several PPy films were controlled between 30 and 1000 nm.” (p. 310, §3. Results and discussion, 1st paragraph, lines 14-15), and that: “Fig. 4 shows the thickness dependence of conductivity in these films. The conductivity of the PPy film strongly depends on film thickness between 200 and 500 nm. Their conductivity is 10-1 to 100 S/cm for the 20-100 nm thick films and 102 S/cm for 600 nm thick films. Especially for the films that have thickness above 600 nm, the conductivity is found to be practically independent of the film thickness.” (p. 310, col. 2, last two lines through p. 311, col. 1, line 5; and Figure 4)(instant claims 8 and 9).
DOMB teaches electropolymerizable monomers and polymeric coatings on implantable devices (title, see whole document), and particularly “Conductive surfaces of e.g., implantable devices, coated with electropolymerized polymers having active substances attached thereto are disclosed. Electropolymerizable monomers designed and used for obtaining such conductive surfaces and processes, devices and methods for attaching the electropolymerized polymers to conductive surfaces are also disclosed. The polymers, processes and devices presented herein can be beneficially used in the preparation of implantable medical devices.” (abstract). DOMB teaches the coatings include “an electropolymerized polymer having a thickness that ranges between 0.1 micron and 10 microns” ([0053], [0211])(instant claim 8).
DOMB teaches that: “Coating of conductive polymers on metal surfaces using electrochemical polymerization which provides stable, adherent and strong electro-conducting coatings have been extensively used in the field of biosensors. As described above, various active enzymes have been conjugated to the tip of biosensors via electrochemical polymerization of conducting monomers including pyrrole, carbazole, and thiophene. This coating indeed adheres well to the metallic tip and is used as conducting polymer capable of transfer of the current signals generated by the enzyme attached to the polymer when activated.” ([0116]).
DOMB teaches that: “While, as is discussed hereinabove, modifying a hydrophilic metal surface of an object is highly beneficial in medical devices, particularly implantable medical devices, the object is preferably a medical device. The medical device can be any metal device that comprises a metal surface and include […].” [emphasis added] and including catheters ([0133]).
DOMB teaches that: “The thickness of the coating is well controlled by the number of cycles applied. For example, a mixture of N-pyrrole propanoic acid, N-pyrrole propanoic acid butyl ester and hexyl ester form a flexible thin porous coating onto a coronary stent that do not tear even upon 50% expansion. Coatings of 0.1 to 2 micron thick were achieved by applying 1 to 20 electro cycles,] respectively.” ([0181]).
DOMB teaches coatings including heparin ([0385]), particularly that: “In a typical reaction, a bioactive agent (for example, heparin) was conjugated to carboxyethyl pyrrole by amide coupling using DEC in Na-HEPES buffer of pH=7.4.” ([0397]), and “Using the general procedure II described above for electropolymerization on stents, an electrocoating having heparin covalently attached thereto was prepared.” ([0398]). The examiner notes that “DEC” in the above paragraph appears to N-(1-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-3-ethylcarbodiimide hydrochloride) ([404]) which is a known coupling agent similar to dicyclohexyl carbodiimide (DCC) as a coupling as described in paragraph [400].
Finding of prima facie obviousness
Rationale and Motivation (MPEP 2142-2143)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to produce a conductive film on a medical device including a conductive beta-substituted-pyrrole-film, as suggested by Roy et al., for a (bio)medical application, and further to substitute with heparin, as suggested by BACKES and Su et al., as heparin is a well-know biocompatible (anticoagulant) layer for catheters, the layer thickness and conductivity being taught by Kim et al. (and DOMB for the thickness), it would have been prima facie obvious to adjust the thickness and the conductivity, as per Kim et al. and DOMB.
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 because the polypyrrole-heparin conjugate conductive films were know in the prior art as coatings for medical devices. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been 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.
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.
Response to Arguments:
Applicant's arguments filed 03/17/2026 have been fully considered and they are persuasive with respect to the previous grounds of rejection. However, a new grounds of rejection is set-forth herein.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mao (Functional Polypyrrole Core-Shell Particles and Flexible Membranes for Biomedical Applications,” 2017; Universite LAVAL Doctoral Thesis, 221-pages) teaches Mao teaches polypyrrole as intrinsically conductive polymers (p. 2, §1.1). Mao teaches that: “According to the substituted position, functionalized Py monomers fall into three types: N-substitution, α-substitution and β-substitution. Taking carboxylic acid-substituted Py as an example, Fig. 1.13 indicates the chemical structures of Py carboxylic acid substituted at the three positions.”
PNG
media_image1.png
362
940
media_image1.png
Greyscale
According to the polymerization mechanism (Fig. 1.4), α-position is the important reactive site for molecular chain growth of PPy. So functionalized PPy based on the α-substituted Py has only been explored by a few researchers. Lee et al. synthesized poly(pyrrole-co-pyrrole-2-carboxylic acid) by modification of PPy surface using pyrrole-2-carboxylic acid, which was further grafted with cell adhesive peptide Arg-Gly-Asp (RGD) to improve the adhesion and spreading of human umbilical vein endothelial cells. In comparison, more researchers used β-substituted and N-substituted Py. […]” (p. 33, line 13 through p. 34, line 3).
Conclusion
Claims 1-2 and 4-10 are pending and have been examined on the merits. Claims 1-2 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103. No claims allowed at this time.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IVAN A GREENE whose telephone number is (571)270-5868. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-5 PM PST.
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, David Blanchard can be reached on (571) 272-0827. 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.
/IVAN A GREENE/Examiner, Art Unit 1619
/TIGABU KASSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1619
1 Of record as cited on Applicant’s IDS dated 02/20/2026, p. 2, citation No. 8.
Prosecution Insights