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. This Office Action is in response to the Application filed 9/26/2023. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claims 1 -13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi, et al. (WO 2019/208669 as listed on the IDS dated 9/26/2023; English Machine Translation provided herewith) in view of Natori et al. (WO 2021/039982 listed on the IDS dated 9/26/2023; US 2022/0163535 used as English Translation). Regarding claim s 1 -2 , Kobayashi et al. teach a particle comprising a polymer having a polymerizable monomer wherein the monomer is a styrene monomer (Abstract, claim 4) thereby reading on the polymer with a repeating unit derived from vinyl based monomer as required by the instant claim 1 , and the styrene based monomer of claim 2 , an organosilane compound (Abstract) , wherein the organosilane compound is a radical polymerizable compound in which an alkyoxy group is bonded to a silicone atom (claim 14) thereby corresponding to the claimed Si-X of Formula (1), and a water-soluble compound (Abstract) thereby reading on the surface of the particle contains a water-soluble polymer . Kobayashi et al. do not particularly teach the organosilane compound Si-X being bonded to t he rest of the structure as required by Formula (1). However, Natori et al., in the same field of endeavor, teach a particle and a ligand on a surface of the particle, wherein the particle has a repeating unit represented by the formula (2-3): Wherein L1 represents an alkylene group having 1 to 15 carbon atoms [0017] thereby corresponding to the L2 in the claimed Formula (1), wherein R2 is a carboxy group or a hydrogen atom thereby corresponding to the R in the claimed Formula (1), wherein the carboxyl group reads on the claimed L1 when L1 is an oxyalkylene having one carbon, and wherein R1 is hydrogen. Natori et al. offer the motivation of using this structure as a ligand on a particle surface for surface layer modification such that the particle has affinity for a target substance in an in vitro diagnostic reagent and kit including the affinity particle [0012]. In light of this benefit, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the ligand having the structure of Natori et al. with the organosilane compound of Kobayashi et al. in the particle of Kobayashi et al., thereby arriving at the claimed invention. Regarding claim 3 , Kobayashi et al. teach the polymer having repeating unit comprising styrene as set forth above, thereby reading on the claimed Formula (2) and further teach the an organosilane compound selected from 3-methacryloxypropyltrimethoxysilane (claim 7) thereby reading on the Formula (3). Regarding claim 4, Kobayashi teach a particle comprising a radical polymerizable monomer consisting of styrene (claim 17) with a reactive functional group containing a mercapto group (claim 10) . Kobayashi et al. do not teach the exact structure as required by the claimed Formula (4). However, Kobayashi teaches mercapto functional groups and styrene monomers with “sufficient specificity” that one of ordinary skill in the art would arrive at the claimed combination. Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention would have found it “obvious to try” the mercapto group functional group together with the styrene monomer as the teaching represents a finite number of identified, predictable combinations. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. , 550 U.S. 398 (2007). Regarding claim 5, Kobayashi et al. teach the particle diameter is 50 nm or more and 400 nm or less [0033] thereby reading on the claimed range of 50 nm or greater and 500 nm or less. Regarding claim 6, Kobayashi et al. teach the water soluble polymer is selected from polyacrylamide, polyvinyl alcohol, polyethylene oxide and polyvinylpyrrolidone (claim 18). Regarding claim 7, Kobayashi et al. teach the particle having a compound having a reactive functional group containing a silicon alkoxide group (claim 19) thereby reading on the siloxane bond. Regarding claim 8, Kobayashi et al. teach a ligand bond [0040] to a reactive functional group wherein the reactive functional group contains a carboxy group (claim 10). Regarding claim 9, Kobayashi et al. do not particularly teach the amount of ligand bound to the particle. However, Kobayashi et al. teach the ligand is an antibody or antigen used to detect an antigen or antibodies in a sample [0044] and that the ligan isa compound that specifically binds to a receptor possessed by a particular target substance [0040]. Therefore the amount of ligand bound to the particle will affect the resulting detection of the antigen or antibodies in a sample. Therefore, the amount of ligand can be optimized to reach the desired detection required via a routine optimization. The case law has held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch , 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to adjust the relative amount of the compound s for the intended application via a routine optimization, thereby obtaining the present invention . Regarding claim 10, Kobayashi et al. teach a test reagent for in vitro diagnosis comprising the particle and a dispersion medium [0043]. Regarding claim 11, Kobayashi et al. teach a test reagent wherein the ligand is an antibody or antigen and the test reagent is used for detecting the antigen or antibody in a specimen by latex agglutination [0044-0044]. Regarding claim 12, Kobayashi et al. teach a test kit for in vitro diagnosis [0045] comprising the test reagent and a housing. Regarding claim 13, Kobayashi et al. teach a method of producing a particle, the method comprising mixing a radical polymerizable monomer, an organosilane compound, an aqueous solution, a radical polymerization initiator, and a water soluble polymer (Abstract), wherein the particle comprises the structure represented by Formula (1) as set forth in the rejection above for claim 1, wherein the organo silane compound reads on the coupling agent , wherein the compound contains a reactive functional group containing a glycidyl group , a compound containing a mercapto group and a carboxy group (claim 10). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT LANEE REUTHER whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-7026 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 7:30-3:30 . 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 Patricia Mallari can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-4729 . 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. /ARRIE L REUTHER/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764