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 .
Claims 1, 24, 5, 7-9, are pending and being examined.
Response to Amendment
The previous rejection of Claim(s) 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2006/0217526 A1 to Pivovar et al. (hereinafter Pivovar) is/are withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
The previous rejection of Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-8, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 08-239395 A to Yoshida et al. (hereinafter Yoshida) is/are withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
The previous rejection of Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-8, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 2053153 A to Deibig et al. (hereinafter Deibig’1) is/are withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
The previous rejection of Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-8, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deibig et al., “Heat-stable polymers. II. Poly(cyclotriphosphazenamide)(polycondensate from 2,2,4,6-tetrakis(dimethylamine)-4,6-dichlorocyclotriphosphazene and aromatic diamines),” Angewandte Makromolekulare Chemie, vol. 25, 179-185, (1972), (hereinafter Deibig’2) is/are withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
The previous rejection of Claim(s) 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Akbas et al., “Synthesis, structural and thermal properties of the hexapyrrolidinocyclotriphosphazenes-based protic molten salts: Antiproliferative effects against HT29, HeLa, and C6 cancer cell lines,” Journal of Molecular Liquids, vol 230, pp. 482-495, (2017), (hereinafter Akbas) is/are withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
The previous rejection of Claim(s) 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2018/0019396 A1 to Kessler et al. (hereinafter Kessler) is/are withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
The previous rejection of Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-8, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2019/0315786 A1 to Li et al. (hereinafter Li) is/are withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
The previous rejection of Claim(s) 1-8, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2020/0136185 A1 to Ji et al. (hereinafter Ji) is/are withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
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.
Claim 2 is 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 2 recites wherein the phosphazene bond-containing polymer…comprises: (i) a structure unit (A-1)… or “(ii) a structural unit (A-2) represented by formula (A-2) and a structural formula unit (A-3) represented by the following formula (A-3)…” However, claim 1 appears to require “two or more cyclic-phosphazene structures…” and it is unclear how the above formulas represent the new limitations. It appears that claim 2 should recite a “repeating” or “two or more” structure units. Furthermore, from the Applicant’s specification, it appears that formulas (D-1) to (D-6) are a clearer representation of claim 1.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 2 recites wherein the phosphazene bond-containing polymer…comprises: (i) a structure unit (A-1)…X1 and X2 are each….a nitrogen-containing group…X1 and X2 are optionally bonded to each other…and the phosphorus atom P or nitrogen atom N in the formula is optionally positively charged…” or “(ii) a structural unit (A-2) represented by formula (A-2) and a structural formula unit (A-3) represented by the following formula (A-3)…” wherein “X1 and X2 are optionally bonded to each other…and the phosphorus atom P or nitrogen atom N in the formula is optionally positively charged.” However, claim 1 states that the phosphazene bond-containing polymer is “cationic” and “having two or more cyclic-phosphazene structures.” It appears that claim 2 states that the cationic charge and cyclic-phosphazene structures are optional requirements and thus, broadens claim 1 and fails to further limit.
From the Applicant’s specification, it appears that formulas (D-1) to (D-6) are a clearer representation of claim 1.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-8, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 106380604 A to Lin et al. (hereinafter Lin).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-8, Lin teaches a porous material containing a polycyclotriphosphazene used to filter out iodine. (See abstract). The polycyclotriphosphazene has a repeating structure unit of the formula
PNG
media_image1.png
120
149
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein R is
PNG
media_image2.png
165
433
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 3), which meets the phosphazene bond with a nitrogen-containing group bonded to the phosphorus atom and nitrogen atom with a hydrocarbon group bonded. The above is also a repeating unit of a polymer and thus, would have two more cyclic-phosphazene structures connected after R group. Lin further teaches the above porous material absorbs methyl iodine (page 3 and Examples). The porous material with the absorbed/captured methyl iodine would form the cationic and counter anion as shown by the Applicant’s examples.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-9, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Benson et al., “Cyclophosphazenes tethered together via N-ring centres with ortho-, meta- and para-xylylene linkers,” Journal of Organometallic Chemistry, vol. 692, pp. 2768–2772 (2007). (hereinafter Benson).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-9, Benson teaches the formulas
PNG
media_image3.png
197
279
media_image3.png
Greyscale
and
PNG
media_image4.png
227
316
media_image4.png
Greyscale
, (page 2769), which meets the claimed cationic phosphazine-bond containing polymer having two cyclic-phosphazene structures, wherein a nitrogen atom is bonded to a hydrocarbon group and a counter anion. Benson teaches the above has uses in polyelectrolyte materials and membranes. (page 2771).
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-9, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brandt et al., “A Regioselective Route to New Polytopic Receptors by Diaminolysis of Chlorocyclotriphosphazatriene-Containing Crown Ethers,” Journal of Organic Chemistry, vol. 64, pp. 7299-7304, (1999). (hereinafter Benson).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-9, Brandt teaches the formula
PNG
media_image5.png
197
271
media_image5.png
Greyscale
, wherein
PNG
media_image6.png
222
162
media_image6.png
Greyscale
and specifically,
PNG
media_image7.png
169
256
media_image7.png
Greyscale
(page 7300-7301), and the above forms a metal-cation complex with metal cations. (page 7302-7303), which meets the claimed cationic phosphazene-bond containing polymer having two cyclic-phosphazene structures, wherein a nitrogen atom is bonded to a hydrocarbon group and a counter anion.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive in part.
On page 6, the Applicant argues that Lin only teaches that the polycyclotriphosphazene porous material “physically absorbs” the iodine and nothing in Lin suggest that the polycyclotriphosphazene “chemically reacts” with the methyl iodine to form a cationic polymer. This is not persuasive because Lin teaches in the background technology is in the development of adsorption materials “with strong iodine binding,” and thus, has a high adsorption capacity/efficiency and that Lin solves these issues with the polycyclotriphosphazene porous material that has a high adsorption capacity for iodine and/or methyl iodine in solution. (page 2-3). It appears that the polycyclotriphosphazene porous material capable of adsorbing methyl iodine because it would bind with iodine. This is further evidenced by the Applicant’s examples which show substantially similar polymer membranes become cationic when mixed with a solution containing methyl iodide. Thus, the porous material of Lin, with the absorbed/captured methyl iodine, would form the cationic and counter anion as shown by the Applicant’s examples.
Applicant’s other arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-9, 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 HA S NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7395. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, Flex schedule 7:30am-4:00pm.
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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571)272-1302. 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.
/HA S NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights