DETAILED ACTION
For this Office action, Claims 1, 5-11, 14-16, 19-20, 23-25, 27 and 32 are pending. Claims 2-4, 12-13, 17-18, 21-22, 26 and 28-31 are canceled.
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 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.
Claims 1, 5-11, 14-16, 19-20, 23-25, 27 and 32 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. Claim 1, upon which the remaining claims are dependent, recites an optional step d. This renders the claims indefinite, as the claims are unclear whether the optional language is required of the prior art in order to read on the claims. Claims 5 and 6 are additionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same reasons regarding their respective optional limitations. For purposes of this examination, the examiner will assume the optional language is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 7, 10-11, 14-16, 19-20, 23-25, 27 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nanjing University of Technology (herein referred to as “Nanjing”, CN101285106B; found in IDS filed 11/15/2023).
Regarding instant Claim 1, Nanjing discloses a method of reducing phosphate in an aqueous preparation (Abstract; Paragraph [0018]; “step 4” of the method; see calcium phosphate precipitate from solution and recovery) comprising:
obtaining the aqueous preparation comprising phosphate and a target molecule (Paragraphs [0016]-[0018]; see also steps 1-3; phosphate prepared by adding phosphoric acid while target molecule is comprised of cellulose and its constituents);
combining the aqueous preparation with a first compound and a second compound, to provide a treated preparation, wherein both compounds comprise a polyvalent cation (Paragraphs [0016]-[0018]; step 4, calcium hydroxide or carbonate is added to solution, followed by sulfuric acid);
mixing the treated preparation at sufficient temperature and for sufficient time for the phosphate and the compounds to form a precipitate, to provide a reduced-phosphate preparation (Paragraph [0022]; solution is given enough time at an ideal temperature for calcium phosphate to be precipitated);
removing the precipitate from the reduced-phosphate preparation (Paragraph [0022]; calcium phosphate is removed via filtration or other separation);
wherein the aqueous preparation maintains a pH between about 4 and about 10 and the treated preparation has a pH between about 4 and about 10 (Examples 1-6; pH for all solutions range from 4.5 to 5.5);
wherein the reduced-phosphate preparation retains a portion of the target molecule (Paragraph [0022]; see hydrolized sugar solution, which comprises xylose and arabinose)
wherein the target molecule is a saccharide selected at least from arabinose and xylose (Paragraph [0022]; see xylose and arabinose).
Regarding instant Claim 7, Claim 1, upon which Claim 7 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing discloses wherein each of the first and second compounds is selected from at least calcium hydroxide and sulfuric acid (Paragraphs [0016]-[0018]; step 4; calcium hydroxide and sulfuric acid may be used).
Regarding instant Claim 10, Claim 1, upon which Claim 10 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the treated preparation comprises the first and second compounds in a ratio of between 0.5:1 to about 7:1 (Paragraphs [0018]-[0022]; Examples 1-6; see highly concentrated sulfuric acid that is added to remove calcium phosphate, approximately 1:1 ratio for removal of the calcium).
Regarding instant Claim 11, Claim 10, upon which Claim 11 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the aqueous preparation comprises soluble phosphate in an amount between 1 and about 1000 mM (Paragraphs [0018]-[0022]; see step 2, feed-liquid ratio is 10-30 g/100 ml; 1-1000 mM would be between 197.13 mg/mL of solvent to 197 g/mL of solvent, wherein 10-30 g/100 mL would fall within this range).
Regarding instant Claim 14, Claim 1, upon which Claim 14 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein after sufficient temperature and for sufficient time for the phosphate and the compounds to combine as precipitate, the precipitate comprises from about 1 wt.% to about 100 wt.% of the phosphate in the treated preparation (Examples 1-6; see that approximately 90% of phosphate is recovered).
Regarding instant Claim 15, Claim 1, upon which Claim 15 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the precipitate is removed by filtration (Paragraph [0022]; calcium phosphate is removed via filtration).
Regarding instant Claim 16, Claim 1, upon which Claim 16 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the reduced-phosphate preparation retains a percentage of the phosphate from the aqueous preparation at between about 1 to about 20% (Examples 4 and 5; phosphate recovery is around 90%; leaving around 10% left in the preparation).
Regarding instant Claim 19, Claim 1, upon which Claim 19 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the aqueous preparation contains at least about 2 wt.% of saccharide (Examples 1-6; see that .8-1.45 g of sugar can be produced from 5 g of raw material, w/v ratio of 20% yields at least 2.5-3.6 wt.% of sugars in solution).
Regarding instant Claim 20, Claim 1, upon which Claim 20 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the reduced-phosphate preparation retains a percentage of the target molecule present in the aqueous preparation between about 50 wt.% to about 100 wt.% (Paragraphs [0018]-[0023]; Examples 1-6; see that see that sugar solution remains after step 4, suggesting most of target molecule remains in solution).
Regarding instant Claim 23, Claim 1, upon which Claim 23 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the aqueous preparation is derived from cultured cells and is a suspension containing a cell lysate (Paragraphs [0018]-[0022]; see cellulose hydrolyzed to obtain sugar liquid).
Regarding instant Claim 24, Claim 1, upon which Claim 24 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the aqueous preparation is derived from cultured cells and the cell is selected from a plant cell (Paragraphs [0018]-[0022]; see steps 1-3, cellulose and culturing via steps 1-3).
Regarding instant Claim 25, Claim 1, upon which Claim 25 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the aqueous preparation is derived from cells processed mechanically or enzymatically lysing the cells (Paragraphs [0018]-[0022]; step 1 involves a physical crushing step of biomass; step 3 involves enzymatic hydrolyzation).
Regarding instant Claim 27, Claim 1, upon which Claim 27 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein each of the first and second compounds provides a content of at least about 0.5 wt% to about 1.5 wt% of the aqueous system (Paragraphs [0018]-[0022]; Examples 1-6) see step 2 and phosphoric acid content at 10-30% w/v; calcium carbonate/hydroxide and sulfuric acid would be added at levels above 0.5 wt% [see “at least above 0.5 wt%”] in order to ensure recovery fractions as recited in the examples).
Regarding instant Claim 32, Claim 1, upon which Claim 32 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the method provides a reduction of at least about 80% in the phosphate concentration in aqueous preparation (Examples 4 and 5; phosphate recovery is around 90%).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanjing University of Technology (herein referred to as “Nanjing”, CN101285106B; found in IDS filed 11/15/2023).
Regarding instant Claim 8, Claim 1, upon which Claim 8 is dependent, has been rejected above. While Nanjing is silent on the amount of the first compound in terms of wt.%, the broad range of what the wt.% can be in the instant claim (0.001-10.0) would make it obvious that whatever effective amount of calcium hydroxide/calcium carbonate for the process of Nanjing would be within this range in order to allow for the reaction to occur.
Regarding instant Claim 9, Claim 1, upon which Claim 9 is dependent, has been rejected above. While Nanjing is silent on the amount of the first compound in terms of wt.%, the broad range of what the wt.% can be in the instant claim (0.001-10.0) would make it obvious that whatever effective amount of calcium hydroxide/calcium carbonate for the process of Nanjing would be within this range in order to allow for the reaction to occur.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanjing University of Technology (herein referred to as “Nanjing”, CN101285106B; found in IDS filed 11/15/2023) in view of Theodore et al. (herein referred to as “Theodore”, US Pat Pub. 2012/0085705).
Regarding instant Claim 5, Claim 1, upon which Claim 5 is dependent, has been rejected above. Nanjing further discloses wherein the polyvalent cation of the first compound is calcium (Paragraph [0018]-[0022]; calcium carbonate or calcium hydroxide).
However the combined references are silent on the polyvalent cation of the second compound comprising calcium, magnesium, zinc, iron, titanium or a mixture thereof.
Theodore discloses wastewater chemical/biological treatment method for open water discharge in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of using calcium compounds to precipitate phosphates (Abstract; Paragraph [0045]). Theodore further discloses that calcium carbonate and calcium hydroxide can both be used to precipitate phosphates for later filtration removal (Paragraph [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the second compound to further include calcium hydroxide/calcium carbonate along with the first compound as taught by Theodore because Theodore discloses such a combination aids in phosphate precipitation (Theodore, Paragraph [0045]).
Regarding instant Claim 6, Claim 1, upon which Claim 6 is dependent, has been rejected above. However, while Nanjing discloses that the first compound comprises calcium (Paragraphs [0018]-[0022]), the reference is silent on the first and second compound comprising calcium.
Theodore discloses wastewater chemical/biological treatment method for open water discharge in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of using calcium compounds to precipitate phosphates (Abstract; Paragraph [0045]). Theodore further discloses that calcium carbonate and calcium hydroxide can both be used to precipitate phosphates for later filtration removal (Paragraph [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the second compound to further include calcium hydroxide/calcium carbonate along with the first compound as taught by Theodore because Theodore discloses such a combination aids in phosphate precipitation (Theodore, Paragraph [0045]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD C GURTOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-3189. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am-5:30pm MT.
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, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
/RICHARD C GURTOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773 04/08/2026
Prosecution Insights