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 1-14 are pending.
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 1-14 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 recites “a plurality of polymer units” at line 3, and at line 8 refers to “the polymer unit”. It is unclear whether this refers to the earlier recited plurality of polymer units.
Claims 1 and 14 recites “wheren the average number of the boronic acid-containing group or the diol group bonded to another polymer unit per molecule of the polymer unit is N”. It is unclear whether N can refer to either one or the other of boronic acid units or diol units of the material for satisfying Mathematical formula 1, or if this refers to the sum of both boronic acid units and diol units bonded to other polymer units. The same appears toward the end of claim 1. Please ensure consistency of claim language throughout.
Claims 2-4 recite “the branched polymer constituting the polymer unit A group and B group.” It is unclear whether this requires that the polymer unit A group and polymer unit B group constitute the same polymer.
Claim 10 recites “a connectivity adjusting agent”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term, since it is not recited in claim 1, and it is unclear how a connectivity adjusting agent relates to the polymer material of claim 1. The Office recommends reciting “further comprising a connectivity adjusting agent, wherein the connectivity adjusting agent is . . . “ or similar language. Althernatively, the claim could be recast to depend from claim 9.
Claims 11 and 14 recites “a polymer unit A group” and “a polymer unit B group”. It is unclear whether these refer to the same polymer unit A and polymer unit B of claims 1-10.
Claim 12 recites “can further contain a connectivity adjusting agent”. With respect to the dependency from claim 10, it is unclear whether this refers to the connectivity adjusting agent of claim 10.
Claim 13 recites “wherein the connectivity adjusting agent is . . . .” To the extent this depends from claims 1-8, such limitation lacks antecedent basis.
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.
Claims 12 and 13 are 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 12 recites “can further contain a connectivity adjusting agent.” To the extent this claim depends from claim 8, the new limitation is optional, and therefore does not further limit claim 11. Furthermore, to the extent the claim depends from claim 9 or 10, the claim does not further limit because claims 9 and 10 already recite a connectivity adjusting agent.
Claim 13, to the extent it depends from claim 10, only recites the same species as claim 10, and does not further limit the claim.
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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, and 35 USC 112(d) set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Although associative compositions having boronic acid moiety containing units and polymers having diol moieties are known, see US 6,340,527, the prior art does not teach or suggest the recited characteristics required by claim 1. WO 2022/092043 teaches a similar system of branched polyethers having diol end groups and branched polyethers having terminal phenylboronic end groups, and teaches total concentration overlapping the recited range, but does not suggest the number of bonded units N following Mathematical Formula 1, and the composotions exemplified therein are not sufficiently similar to presume such characteristics as inherent.
Conclusion
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