DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s amendment dated 29 July 2026 is hereby acknowledged. Claims 1-7, 10, and 12-20 as amended are pending, with claims 13-20 withdrawn. All outstanding objections and rejections made in the previous Office Action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior office action.
New grounds of rejection set forth below are necessitated by applicant’s amendment filed on 29 July 2026. In particular, claim 1 has been amended to require specific group. For this reason, the present action is properly made final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hanabusa et al., “Synthesis and properties of polymeric iron(II)-complexes containing terpyridinyl groups,” Makromol. Chem. 191, 391-396 (1990) (“Hanabusa”) as evidenced by US 3,643,672 A (“Brown”).
The second reference is used here to show that a recited property is inherent. See MPEP 2131.01.
As to claims 1, 2, 4-7, and 10, Hanabusa teaches a polymerization reaction product of 4’-[4-(2-acryloyloxyethoxy)phenyl]-2,2’:6’,2”-terpyridine (p. 393), which compound meets the formula for the heterocyclic ligand of formula I where m and t is 0 (as required by claims 1, 4, and 5), n is 1 (as require by claims 1 and 6, R2 is A-L-Pg (as required by claims 1 and 7) where A is aryl, L is a linking group, specifically C2-alkylene as required by claim 10.
The reaction product further includes methyl methacrylate (p. 393). While it is not stated that this monomer is suitable for making ophthalmic device precursor, it is well known, as evidenced by Brown, 1:7-10, that methyl methacrylate is an ordinary monomer for the making of contact lenses, an ophthalmic device, and is thus a monomer suitable for making an ophthalmic device. Further, while Hanabusa does not state the polymer is an ophthalmic device precursor, it is the same material as recited, and thus presumably useful as a ophthalmic device, specifically contact lens, precursor as required by claims 1 and 2.
As to claim 3, Hanabusa teaches methyl methacrylate, a hydrophilic component (1:8-10; see also, Brown, 1:7-15, discussing water absorption of methyl methacrylate).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Hanabusa, while teaching an analogous compound, does not provide rationale to use the compound of clam 12 in the polymer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7 and 10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KREGG T BROOKS whose telephone number is (313)446-4888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9 am to 5:30 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, Arrie Reuther can be reached at (571)270-7026. 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.
/KREGG T BROOKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Prosecution Insights