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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group III, claims 7-10 in the reply filed on 01/29/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-6 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim status
The examiner acknowledged the amendment made to the claims on 01/29/2026.
Claims 1-10 are pending. Claims 1-6 are withdrawn without traverse in response to the restriction requirement. Claim 7 is currently amended. Claims 8-10 are previously presented. Claims 7-10 are hereby examined on the merits.
Specification
The Abstract of the disclosure is objected to because there are more than 150 words and more than 15 lines of text in the instant Abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph preferably within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The Abstract should not exceed 15 lines of text. Abstracts exceeding 15 lines of text or 150 words should be checked to see that they are as concise as the disclosure permits. The form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as "means" and "said," should be avoided. The abstract should sufficiently describe the disclosure to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the halogenated” in the first line should read “a halogenated”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: step (A), “preparing a halogenated curcumin derivative aqueous solution” should read “preparing an aqueous solution of the halogenated curcumin derivative”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because a claim directed to a “use” (an application of is construed as “use of”) is considered to be an improper definition of a process per MPEP § 2173.05(q).
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 7 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 7 is directed to a use (e.g., an application) of a halogenated curcumin derivative without any steps as to how the use is to be practiced. Therefore, it is unclear what steps must be present in order to meet the claim.
Further, since claim 8 positively recites active steps (A)-(D), claim 8 is construed to be directed to a method of preserving aquatic product comprising steps (A)-(D), and for the purpose of examination, claim 7 and claim 8 are grouped in the 35 USC 103 rejection below.
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.
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang CN104304408 A (cited in the IDS submitted 11/16/2023, machine translation of the description relied upon for reference, hereinafter referred to as Tang) in view of Gong, “Inactivation of specific spoilage organism (Pseudomonas) of sturgeon by curcumin-mediated photodynamic inactivation”, Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy 2020, 31, 101827, pages 1-7 (hereinafter referred to as Gong), Zhao CN110150372 A (cited in the IDS submitted 11/16/2023, machine translation of the description relied upon for reference, hereinafter referred to as Zhao), Wang, “Antimicrobial photodynamic inactivation with curcumin against Staphylococcus saprophyticus, in vitro and on fresh dough sheet”, LWT - Food Science and Technology, 2021,147, 111567, pages 1-8 (hereinafter referred to as Wang), Takahashi US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0048901 A1 (cited in the Requirement for Restriction/Election issued 12/01/2025, hereinafter referred to as Takahashi), and Crivello US Patent Application 2008/0260960 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Crivello).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Tang teaches a method of preserving an aquatic product (e.g., a seafood such as oyster) by photodynamic sterilization (0002; 0006), wherein curcumin is used as a photosensitizer to aid in the generation of reactive singlet oxygen species for photodynamic sterilization (0020; 0006), and wherein the method comprising: providing curcumin aqueous solution (0020; 0013, e.g., adding a photosensitizer to seawater); soaking (e.g., immersing) the aquatic product in the seawater that contains the photosensitizer (0014); and removing the aquatic product from the seawater and irradiating the aquatic product with blue light to kill bacterial in the aquatic product (0015; 0023). Inherently the first step occurs in a container or a tank such that the soaking could be performed.
Tang teaches providing the photosensitizer in a container, but is silent regarding using a “dark” container.
Gong in the field of photodynamic inactivation teaches a method of inactivating the spoilage organism in an aquatic product (e.g., sturgeon), the method comprising immersing sturgeon pieces in the curcumin solution followed by irradiating the sturgeon pieces with a blue light (Abstract; page 2, left hand column, section 2.1). Further, Gong teaches keeping prepared curcumin solution in the dark prior to use (page 2, left hand column, section 2.1, 1st para.). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the purpose of doing so is to protect the curcumin from being prematurely excited by the visible light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Tang by keeping the photosensitizer in the dark tank for the purpose of protecting the curcumin from being prematurely excited by the light.
Tang teaches aquatic product but is silent regarding cleaning the aquatic product with sterile normal saline.
Zhao in the field of photodynamic sterilization teaches a method of sterilizing an aquatic product (e.g., sturgeon), the method comprising cleaning (e.g., rinsing) sturgeon fillets with normal (e.g., 0.9%) sterile saline solution (0011; 0016), followed by spraying curcumin aqueous solution onto the sturgeon fillets and irradiating the sturgeon fillets with LED blue light (0012-0019).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Tang by subjecting the aquatic product to normal sterile saline rinsing so as to obtain a cleaned aquatic product prior to contacting with the photosensitizer.
Tang teaches soaking the aquatic product in the photosensitizer aqueous solution for 6 hours thus being silent regarding the incubation time of 10 min.
Wang in the field of curcumin-mediated photodynamic inactivation teaches incubating Staphylococcus saprophyticus-contained dough sheet with curcumin solution for 15 min, followed by irradiation with blue light (e.g., 420 nm) (Abstract; page 3, left hand column, section 2.11). Additionally, Wang teaches that the reduction of bacterial counts is dependent on incubation time, curcumin concentration, light dosage, etc., for example, longer incubation time leads to more bacterial reduction till it reaches a plateau (page 6, right hand column, “Conclusion”; see also Fig. 1 panel (b)).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to manipulate the duration of incubating the aquatic product with the photosensitizer for efficient bacterial reduction. As such, the incubation time as recited in the claim is merely an obvious variant of the prior art.
On the limitation about draining the water on the surface of the aquatic product, Tang teaches that the concentration of the photosensitizer used for incubating the aquatic product is 20 µM (0042). Further, Wang teaches that the reduction of bacterial counts is dependent on curcumin concentration (page 6, right hand column, “Conclusion”; see also Fig. 1 panel (a).), therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to remove or drain the water from the surface of the aquatic product upon cleaning with normal saline so as to avoid the dilution of the curcumin.
Further, regarding the limitation that the step of irradiation is conducted “immediately” after the soaking or incubation step, once the aquatic product has finished the uptake of the photosensitizer, the step of irradiation will naturally follow and there is no reason to delay the next step.
Tang teaches curcumin thus being silent regarding using a halogenated curcumin derivative as represented by formula (I) as the photosensitizer.
Takahashi teaches a curcumin derivative that is used as a preventive or therapeutic agent of Alzheimer’s disease, and such a curcumin derivative can be administered orally (0001; 0063). An example of the curcumin derivative is (1E,6E)-1-(4-fluoro-3-methoxyphenyl)-7-(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)hepta-1,6-diene-3,5-dione (Example 112, page 24, 0410), which meets formula I. Note that an equilibrium exists between the enol form and keto from, hence tautomerism.
Crivello teaches that curcumin is a conjugated phenolic compound. Observations have indicated that curcumin has a low oxidation potential in the ground state and suggest that the oxidation potential may be further lowered on photoexcitation. The ability of a compound to undergo photoinduced one electron oxidation is essential for its activity as a photosensitizer. Analogues of curcumin, such as curcuminoids, incorporating the same extended conjugated diketone chromophore can be readily used for excellent photosensitizing activity (0053).
Tang, Takahashi and Crivello are all directed to curcumin/curcuminoid, and wherein Takahashi teaches a curcuminoid that bears the same extended conjugated diketone structure motif as curcumin, Crivello confirms that curcuminoids that incorporate the same extended conjugated diketone can be used for a photosensitizer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Tang by substituting the curcuminoid of Takahashi for the curcumin of Tang for the photosensitizer with reasonable expectation, for the reason that prior art has established that a curcuminoid and curcumin are functional equivalent suitable for use a photosensitizer. Substituting equivalent known for the same purpose is prima facie obvious. MPEP 2144.06 II.
Regarding claim 9, Tang teaches that the concentration of the photosensitizer used for incubating the aquatic product is 20 µM (0042); Gong teaches a photosensitizer concentration of 30 µM (page 2, left hand column, section 2.1); Zhao teaches a photosensitizer concentration of 30 µM (0018); and Wang teaches a photosensitizer concentration of 12.5 µM, 25 µM and 50 µM (page 3, left hand column, section 2.11). Note that each of Tang, Gong, Zhao and Wang teaches a photosensitizer concentration that falls with the range of claim 9. Further, Wang teaches that the reduction of bacterial counts is dependent on curcumin concentration (page 6, right hand column, “Conclusion”; see also Fig. 1 panel (a).), therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to manipulate the concentration of the curcuminoid for an efficient sterilization.
Regarding claim 10, Tang teaches an irradiation time of 60 second (0046) with blue light, the wavelength of which necessarily falls with or overlaps the range of 400-480 nm since such a range covers blue light; Gong teaches that the sturgeon pieces are irradiated with a blue light (470 nm peak maximum; 15 W optical powder and 90 second irradiation time) (page 2, left hand column, section 2.1); and Zhao teaches the sturgeon fillets are irradiated with a blue light (430-480 nm; 15 W optical powder and 90 second irradiation time) (0058). Additionally, since it is known that a photosensitizer absorbs light of a specific wavelength to enter the excited state so as to interact with surrounding oxygen to generate reactive singlet oxygen species, and the singlet oxygen species can destroy the macromolecular structure of cells and lead to cell lysis (see Tang 0006), one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to manipulate the wavelength, power and irradiated time so as to ensure that an sufficient amount of singlet oxygen species is generated to kill the bacteria.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANGQING LI whose telephone number is (571)272-2334. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00.
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, NIKKI H DEES can be reached at 571-270-3435. 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.
/CHANGQING LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Prosecution Insights