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 .
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 5-9 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.
In claim 5, the claimed structure is not clear. Specifically, the claim refers to the zinc and silver particles, individually, as microbatteries, however, a battery is defined as an anode, a cathode and an electrolyte. Further, claim 5 recites that the plurality of microbatteries has at least one pair of electrodes embedded on or within the polymer substrate, but the specification states that the electrodes are also the zinc or silver particles. If the particles are both the electrodes and the batteries, the claimed structure is not clear. For purposes of the art rejections below, the particles are interpreted as being both the electrodes and the microbatteries.
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.
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fan et al, CN 220652609.
Fan discloses a nonwoven fabric including a plurality of zinc and silver particles, wherein the nonwoven can be used to promote a microcurrent and promote wound healing by contacting it with saline, water, blood or wound exudate to form a microbattery dressing. See page 2, penultimate paragraph of provided machine translation. The fabric can have a thickness of 0.5-3 mm. See final paragraph of page 2. The zinc and silver is applied by various methods including printing and coating. See penultimate of paragraph of page 3. Since the fabric functions electrochemically the zinc and silver particles are equated with the claimed microbatteries and first and second electrode.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan et al, CN 220652609 in view of Osborn et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0187498.
Fan discloses a nonwoven fabric including a plurality of zinc and silver particles, wherein the nonwoven can be used to promote a microcurrent and promote wound healing by contacting it with saline, water, blood or wound exudate to form a microbattery dressing. See page 2, penultimate paragraph of provided machine translation. The fabric can have a thickness of 0.5-3 mm. See final paragraph of page 2. The zinc and silver is applied by various methods including printing and coating. See penultimate of paragraph of page 3. Since the fabric functions electrochemically the zinc and silver particles are equated with the claimed microbatteries and first and second electrode.
Fan differs from the claimed invention because it does not disclose the fiber diameter, the diameter of the particles or the percent of the surface of the fiber occupied by the particles.
Osborn teaches suitable fiber diameters for a structure which includes polymeric electrospun fibers and zinc and silver particles as suitably being 1000 nm or less, and wherein in some embodiments no more than 20% of the fibers have a diameter of greater than 700 nm. See paragraph 0013.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have selected suitable fiber sizes as taught by Osborn to form the fibers of Fan.
With regard to the particle size, it would have been obvious to have selected the size of the particles relative to the size of the fibers so that the particles would remain bonded to the fibers and to have selected the amount of particles and thus the amount of surface coverage, which provided sufficient particles for the fabric to function electrochemically.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osborn et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0187498 in view of TWI680880B.
Osborn discloses a nonwoven fabric formed from polyamide fibers wherein the fibers of the nonwoven include zinc particles. See paragraph 0010. The fabric functions antimicrobially. See paragraph 0002. The fibers can further comprise silver particles. See paragraph 0013. The fibers can be formed by electrospinning. See paragraphs 0013, 0120. The fibers can have a diameter of 1000 nm or less, and wherein in some embodiments no more than 20% of the fibers have a diameter of greater than 700 nm. See paragraph 0013. Osborn teaches that adding topical treatments of silver onto fabrics to provide an antimicrobial fabric often results in a fabric which loses efficacy because the to the polymer itself and forming by electrospinning provide a durably antimicrobial fabric. See paragraph 0031-0032. The fibers can preferably have a diameter of less than 25 microns. See paragraph 0036. The zinc is present in amounts of 100 ppb to 4000 ppm. See paragraph 0039. The zinc can be added to the polymer before electrospinning. See paragraph 0040. Additional antimicrobial additives such as gold and silver can also be added to the composition before electrospinning. See paragraph 0057. Fiber diameters can be anywhere from 25 microns to less than one micron, such as 100-950 nm. See paragraph 0064. Besides polyamide, other polymers can be used to form the fibers, including polyolefins, polyesters cellulose ether and ester, polyethylene terephthalate.
Osborn differs from the claimed invention because it does not disclose employing a metal precursor and then reducing to form the metal particles.
However, TWI680880B discloses providing a antimicrobial metal precursor as part of a polymeric composition which is then electrospun and then reducing by a plasma treatment to provide a metal component of the polymeric fiber. See page 5 of the translation provided by Applicant.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have employed a metal precursor as taught by TW’880 in order to avoid adding particles before the fibers were electrospun to avoid clogging of the electrospinning apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M IMANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Wednesday 7AM-7:30; Thursday 10AM -2 PM.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/ELIZABETH M IMANI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789