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 Objections
Claims 2-3 and 8-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
A phrase, “one or more selected from a group” in claims 2-3 and 8-9 should be followed by “consisting”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3 and 6-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over English translation copy of Korean Unexamined Patent Publication No. KR 10-2013-0004794 A to Lee et al. (hereinafter “Lee”) in view of English translation copy of Korean Unexamined Patent Publication No. KR 10-2020-0027381 A (Choo).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a separation membrane i.e. membrane filter for water treatment wherein the separation membrane is formed by using a crosslinking agent to chemically bond to the surface of a separation membrane in contact with water to be treated, a conjugate of a quorum sensing-inhibiting enzyme and a water-soluble polymer for fixing the enzyme (see last two paragraph in page 9 and first paragraph in page 10; last paragraph in page 10 and the first paragraph in page 11; figure 3; claims 1-2 and 4).
Claim 1 differs from Lee in reciting quorum-inhibiting microorganisms.
Choo discloses that, as a carrier material containing a hydrophilic natural polymer as a main component, a solid substance is formed in a network structure that minimizes resistance to material transfer through crosslinking which is a chemical bond in a calcium chloride solution. Thus, it is possible to immobilize not only biofilm formation inhibiting microorganisms i.e. quorum quenching microorganisms, but also enzymes produced by the microorganisms (see page 5, next to last paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute quorum inhibiting microorganism of Choo for quorum quenching enzymes of Lee for the same purpose of controlling biofouling. See MPEP 2144.06 II. In re Ruff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958).
Regarding claim 2, Choo discloses the quorum quenching microorganisms comprise one or more selected from a group of Rhodococcus sp. BH4, Acinetobacter sp. DKY-1, Pseudomonas sp. Li4-2, Pseudomonas sp. 1A1, Pseudomonas sp. KS2, Pseudomonas sp. KS10, Bacillus methylotrophicus, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, Candida albicans, Arthrobacter sp. MP1-2, Delftia sp. Le2-5, and Ralstonia sp. XJ12B (see page 5, third paragraph).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses that chitosan is used as the water-soluble polymer (see page 10, last paragraph; claim 7). Choo also discloses polyvinyl alcohol, alginate and polyethylene glycol (see page 6, second paragraph).
Regarding claim 6, the water permeability of the separation membrane for water treatment can be optimized by a person skilled in the art depending on the capacity of wastewater treatment.
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses a method for manufacturing a separation membrane for water treatment, the method comprising: a step for mixing a biofilm formation-inhibiting enzyme with an aqueous solution of a water-soluble polymer to form an aggregate of the biofilm formation-inhibiting enzyme and the water-soluble polymer, filtering an aqueous solution containing the aggregate through a separation membrane, and disposing the aggregate of the biofilm formation-inhibiting enzyme and the water-soluble polymer on the water-to-be-treated-side surface of the separation membrane; and a step for reacting a crosslinking agent with the surface of the separation membrane on which the aggregate is disposed, and thereby chemically bonding the biofilm formation-inhibiting enzyme and the water-soluble polymer (last paragraph in page 10 and the first paragraph in page 11; figure 3; claim 9).
Claim 7 differs from Lee in reciting quorum-inhibiting microorganisms and impregnating the separation membrane.
Choo discloses that, as a carrier material containing a hydrophilic natural polymer as a main component, a solid substance is formed in a network structure that minimizes resistance to material transfer through crosslinking which is a chemical bond in a calcium chloride solution. Thus, it is possible to immobilize not only biofilm formation inhibiting microorganisms i.e. quorum quenching microorganisms, but also enzymes produced by the microorganisms (see page 5, next to last paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute quorum inhibiting microorganism of Choo for quorum quenching enzymes of Lee for the same purpose of controlling biofouling. See MPEP 2144.06 II. In re Ruff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958).
Lee teaches that an aqueous solution containing the aggregate is filtered through a separation membrane (see claim 9). Such step is equivalent to impregnating a membrane filter in a solution containing quorum quenching microorganisms and hydrophilic polymers and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 8, Choo discloses the quorum quenching microorganisms comprise one or more selected from a group of Rhodococcus sp. BH4, Acinetobacter sp. DKY-1, Pseudomonas sp. Li4-2, Pseudomonas sp. 1A1, Pseudomonas sp. KS2, Pseudomonas sp. KS10, Bacillus methylotrophicus, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, Candida albicans, Arthrobacter sp. MP1-2, Delftia sp. Le2-5, and Ralstonia sp. XJ12B (see page 5, third paragraph).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses that chitosan is used as the water-soluble polymer (see page 10, last paragraph; claim 7). Choo also discloses polyvinyl alcohol, alginate and polyethylene glycol (see page 6, second paragraph).
Regarding claim 10, claimed parts by weight of the quorum quenching microorganisms and hydrophilic polymer could be optimized by a person skilled in the art through repeated experiments to arrive at desired capacity of inhibiting biofouling of the membrane.
Regarding claim 11, Lee discloses a separation membrane for water treatment wherein the separation membrane is formed by using a crosslinking agent to chemically bond to the surface of a separation membrane in contact with water to be treated, a conjugate of a quorum sensing-inhibiting enzyme and a water-soluble polymer for fixing the enzyme (see last two paragraph in page 9 and first paragraph in page 10; last paragraph in page 10 and the first paragraph in page 11; figure 3; claims 1-2 and 4). Lee discloses that the formation of a biofilm which grows on the surface of a separation membrane for water treatment and causes biofilm contamination problems is suppressed during the operation of a water treatment process using the separation membrane (see page 4, Technical Field).
Claim 11 differs from Lee in reciting quorum-inhibiting microorganisms.
Choo discloses that, as a carrier material containing a hydrophilic natural polymer as a main component, a solid substance is formed in a network structure that minimizes resistance to material transfer through crosslinking which is a chemical bond in a calcium chloride solution. Thus, it is possible to immobilize not only biofilm formation inhibiting microorganisms i.e. quorum quenching microorganisms, but also enzymes produced by the microorganisms (see page 5, next to last paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute quorum inhibiting microorganism of Choo for quorum quenching enzymes of Lee for the same purpose of controlling biofouling. See MPEP 2144.06 II. In re Ruff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958).
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses a reverse osmosis/nanofiltration process used in seawater desalination and water purification and a separation membrane bioreactor process used in wastewater treatment (see page 4, last paragraph – page 5, first paragraph).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Choo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of English translation copy of Korean Unexamined Patent Publication No. KR 10-2019-0088225 A to Woo et al. (hereinafter “Woo”).
Lee in view of Choo discloses the separation membrane i.e. membrane filter as described above.
Claim 4 differs from Lee in view of Choo in reciting that the surface of the membrane filter for water and wastewater treatment is coated with glycerol.
Woo discloses that a water treatment separation membrane has a first protective layer containing a glycerin-based material on one surface thereof for improving salt removal and permeate flow (see page 6, third paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include a coating of glycerol as a protective layer on the surface of the separation membrane of Lee in view Choo to improve salt removal and permeate flow as suggested by Woo.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1142. The examiner can normally be reached Maxi Flex.
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, IN SUK BULLOCK can be reached at 571-272-5954. 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.
/John Kim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
JK
1/29/26