DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s response of February 27, 2026 has been fully considered. No claims have been amended, added, or cancelled and claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on February 27, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 11,898,036 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 2-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zeller (US 2019/0330453).
Regarding claim 2, Zeller teaches a biomass-elastomer composite including an elastomer matrix and a biomass reinforcement distributed through the elastomer matrix, wherein the biomass includes algae and the algae includes protein, ash, and carbohydrate (¶6, 8). The composite also includes a mixing additive selected from the group consisting of a plasticizer (¶8), a compatibilizer (¶9), a vulcanizing agent (¶11), a curing agent (¶11), a crosslinker (¶32), a coupling agent (¶9), an elastomer compound having polar functionalization (¶9), a thermoplastic compound having polar functionalization (¶9), a performance enhancing additive (¶8), and combinations thereof (¶9), wherein the mixing additive is operable to deliver the desired properties of the composite material (¶8). The composite material is used to make solid goods such as shoe soles, grips, automotive parts, hosing, and tires (¶44).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Zeller teaches a solid good with an abrasion resistance as measured by DIN abrasion testing of 80 or 65 mm2 (Fig. 2D).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Zeller teaches a solid good with a specific gravity of 1.11 or 1.09 g/cc (Fig. 2D).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Zeller teaches a solid good with a Shore A hardness of 61 or 60 (Fig. 2D).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Zeller teaches a solid good with a tear strength of 66 or 69 kg/cm (Fig. 2D).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 11-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Independent claim 1 is directed to a biomass-elastomer composite comprising an elastomer matrix, a biomass reinforcement distributed through the elastomer matrix, wherein the biomass comprises algae and the algae includes protein, ash, and carbohydrates when distributed into the elastomer matrix, and a mixing additive selected from a list, wherein the mixing additive is sufficient to form a solid good. The closest prior art references of record, Kang (KR 101182251) and Falken et al. (US 2017/0183469), do not explicitly teach that the algae used in the compositions does indeed contain protein, ash, and carbohydrate and that it has not been removed previously. As previously argued by applicant in the parent application, there is evidence provided in each reference that these components have been removed from the algae and that the resulting mixture is structurally different from that claimed. Therefore, claims 1 and 11-20 are allowable.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 27, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that claim 1 is now allowable since the obviousness-type double patenting rejection has been resolved, and that claims 2-10 should also be allowable as they ultimately depend from claim 1. This argument is unpersuasive. As explained in the Office Action of January 30, 2026, this application is a continuation-in-part of Application No. 16/396,370, which has a filing date of April 26, 2019 with claim to a provisional application filed April 27, 2018. In the current claim set, claims 1 and 11-20 are supported by the disclosure of the prior application and therefore are entitled to its filing date of April 27, 2018. However, claims 2-10 are not supported by the disclosure of the prior application. Specifically, in claim 2, the solid good being a fitting, a strap, a building material, or a floor mat is new in this application; and the full ranges claimed for each property in claims 3-10 are new in this application. Therefore, since there is no support in the prior application for claims 2-10, they have the effective filing date of this application which is February 12, 2024. Each of claims 2-10 contain the limitations of claim 1 plus their own limitations, but have an effective filing date of February 12, 2014. It does not matter that they depend from claim 1 for allowability purposes in this specific scenario. Therefore, claims 2-10 remain rejected as set forth above and in the Office Action of January 30, 2026.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA C SCOTT whose telephone number is (571)270-3303. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30-5:00, EST.
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.
/ANGELA C SCOTT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767