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. Claim Objections Claims 10-14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recited “dryat” in claims 10-14 should be replaced with --dry at--. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 1-20 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. The term “ high-efficiency gel ” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ high-efficiency gel ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purpose of further examination, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation, the phrase “A preparation method of high-efficiency gel” i s interpreted as -- A gel preparation method -- . Claims 2-20 are rejected likewise as depending on claim 1. Claim 4 recites the limitation " the dry paper towel ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The term “ with better morphology and pores ” in claim s 5-9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ with better morphology and pores ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purpose of further examination, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation, this term is not considered necessary . Claims 15-20 recites “ the desired low evaporation enthalpy photothermal hydrogel ” which is a relative term and lacks antecedent basis. For the purpose of further examination, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation, this phrase is interpreted as -- a photothermal hydrogel --. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Independent claim 1 is directed to a preparation method of high-efficiency gel, comprising: Step 1, add 2-10mg/ml dopamine hydrochloride solution to 0.2-1wt% ammonia solution to prepare dopamine aqueous solution, and add 0.1-0.5g carnauba to 100ml limonene to prepare carnauba wax solution, and prepare agar aqueous solution; Step 2, heat the agar aqueous solution prepared in step 1, then pour it into a polystyrene mold and cool it down to room temperature to form a gel, place the gel at 4°C for 24 hours to age the gel, then freeze it in liquid nitrogen for 3-6 hours, and then place the gel at -18°C for 12 hours to prevent cracking due to excessive temperature difference, and then thaw at room temperature; Step 3, soak the thawed gel prepared in step 2 in the dopamine aqueous solution for 24 hours, and in-situ polymerize dopamine on the surface of the gel to generate a light-to-heat conversion material polydopamine; Step 4, soak the gel obtained in step 3 in an ethanol solution to change liquid; Step 5, soak the gel obtained in step 4 in the carnauba wax solution, and then dry it under normal pressure to obtain photothermal aerogel . There is no prior art that teaches or makes obvious the aforementioned limitations as claimed. The closest prior art is the disclosure of Feng et al (CN 112442193 A). Feng teaches a method for preparing poly(dopamine)-agar/N-hydroxyethyl acrylamide double network hydrogel comprising: preparing an agar aqueous solution; add dopamine hydrochloride into the solution; the solution was poured into a mold, and photopolymerization reaction was carried out under UV light and a double network hydrogel is obtained [P2L10-24]. The prior art does not teach the claimed carnauba, limonene or ammonia. Most importantly, u nlike the instant invention that forms polydopamine on the surface of a pre-formed agar gel, the prior art teaches a composite that has agar and polydopamine mixed evenly before forming a gel. It seems like both the properties and structure of the prior art product would be different from the product of the claimed method. The order of steps will give the gel a very particular structure, and that structure would result in a unique set of light-to heat conversion properties not found in the prior art. T herefore, it is not obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Feng with a secondary reference teaching carnauba, limonene and ammonia to arrive at the claimed method. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JIANGTIAN XU whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-1621 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Thursday . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Robert Jones can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-7733 . 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. /JIANGTIAN XU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762