-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 .
Applicant’s response dated August 17, 2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
This application claims benefit in provisional application 63/399,122 filed on August 18, 2022.
Claim Status
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 8-18 are examined. Claims 1-7, 19, and 20 are withdrawn.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II (Claims 8-18), drawn to a system in the reply filed on August 17, 2026, is acknowledged.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Accordingly, claims 1-7, 19, and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being withdrawn to a non-elected invention, and non-elected species of the invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claims.
Response to the restriction requirement of June 18, 2026 was timely filed.
Claims 8-18 are examined on the merits.
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 8-18 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.
Claim 8 recites “cage-like”. The claim is indefinite because the addition of the word “like” to an otherwise definite term, such as cage, extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite.
Claims 9-18 are indefinite because the claims depend from an indefinite base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
The subject matter of claims 8-18 is allowable. The closest prior art of record is Delaney (WO 2021/041222 A1 Published March 4, 2021 – of record in IDS) and Kim (Polymer Bulletin, 49, 341-348 (2003) – of record in IDS). Delaney teaches a multi-arm polymer comprising a core and a plurality of polyoxazoline segments (or arms) having a first end that is covalently attached to the core and a second end comprising a moiety that comprises a reactive group. In some aspects, systems are provided that comprise a first composition comprising such a multi-arm polymer and a second composition comprising a multifunctional compound that comprises functional groups that are reactive with the reactive groups of the multi-arm polymer. In some aspects, systems are provided that comprise crosslinked reaction products of such a multi-arm polymer and such a multifunctional compound (Abstract). The core of the multi-arm polymers may be selected from a polyol residue core and a calyx[n]arene core (paragraph 0008). In certain embodiments, the reactive multi-arm polyoxazoline may be crosslinked with a multifunctional compound having functional groups that are reactive with the reactive groups of the multi-arm polyoxazoline. For example, in some embodiments, the reactive groups of the reactive multi-arm polyoxazoline are nucleophilic groups and the functional groups of the multifunctional compound group are electrophilic groups. In some embodiments, the reactive groups of the reactive multi-arm polyoxazoline are electrophilic groups and the functional groups of the multifunctional compound are
nucleophilic groups (paragraph 0034).
Delaney does not teach a core that is “cage-like silicon-oxygen core”.
Kim teaches hybrid star-shaped polyoxazolines having POSS core (Summary and Scheme 2).
While both Delaney and Kim teach chemical compounds having a core and polyoxazoline-containing arms, it would not have been obvious to the skilled artisan to combine the references and arrive at the claimed invention. Based on the prior art of record, polyols and calix[n]arene and a silicon-oxygen cage, such as POSS, are not considered equivalent cores for making chemical compounds that are precursors to a hydrogel intended to be administered into a subject. Paragraphs 0023 and 0025 of Delaney describes suitable calix[n]arenes and polyols, respectively. All of the exemplary compounds are organic compounds, whereas silicon-oxygen cage-like compounds are inorganic. The prior art of record does not teach polyols, calix[n]arenes, and silicon-oxygen cage-like compounds as equivalent. The skilled artisan would have recognized the structural differences between polyols and calix[n]arenes, and silicon-oxygen cage-like compounds and concluded that the two are not sufficiently chemically similar that there would have been a reasonable expectation of success in replacing polyols (or calix[n]arenes) with silicon-oxygen cage-like compounds to arrive at a predictable result.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alma - Pipic whose telephone number is (571)270-7459. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Michael Hartley can be reached on 571-272-0616. 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.
/ALMA PIPIC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1617
Prosecution Insights