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 without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on July 21, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 16-35 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Negahi Shirazi ("Polymer Crosslinking: a new Strategy to Enhance Mechanical Properties and Structural Stability of Bioactive Glasses", The University of Sydney, March 2015) in view of Mariappan et al (Influence of silver on the structure, dielectric and antibacterial effect of silver doped bioglass-ceramic nanoparticles, 2017, Ceramics International, Vol. 43, p.2196-220).
Regarding Claims 1-2: Negahi Shirazi teaches a biomaterial containing gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) and bioactive glass, wherein the bioactive glass is chemically attached to the GelMA by way of a covalent bond (p.vi, Abstract). Negahi Shirazi further teaches the incorporation of ionic silver into ceramic materials (p.20, para. 3) but does not specifically teach a silver-containing bioactive glass.
Mariappan teaches a silver-containing bioglass (p.2196, Abstract), wherein the incorporation of silver imparts the bioactive glass with antibacterial properties (p.2200, col. 1). Mariappan and Negahi Shirazi are analogous art because they are directed toward the same field of endeavor, namely bioactive glasses for use in bone tissue healing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate silver into the bioactive glass taught by Negahi Shirazi in order to impart it with antibacterial properties and prevent infection.
Regarding Claims 3-4: Negahi Shirazi teaches a (3-glycidyloxypropyl)trimethoxysilane (GPTMS) crosslinker on the GelMA (p.41, Section 3.7), wherein the GPTMA creates a covalent bridge between the GelMA and the bioactive glass (p.63, para. 2).
Regarding Claim 5: Negahi Shirazi teaches that silicon is the essential component of bioactive glass and that other ionic components, such as calcium and phosphorus, may be incorporated (p.21, para. 1). However, Negahi Shirazi does not specifically teach that the bioactive glass comprises oxides of silicon, calcium, and phosphorus.
Mariappan teaches a bioglass comprising oxides of silicon, calcium, and phosphorus (p.2197, Section 2), wherein said oxides facilitate the formation of hydroxyapatite, which allows the bioactive glass to bond with living hard tissue/bone (p.2201, col. 1, para. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate oxides of silicon, calcium, and phosphorus into the bioactive glass of Negahi Shirazi in order to form a hydroxyapatite layer and allow for bonding of the bioactive glass to hard tissue.
Regarding Claim 7: Mariappan teaches silver oxide as the silver source in the bioactive glass (p.2197, Section 2).
Regarding Claim 8: Negahi Shirazi teaches that the composition is dissolved in an aqueous solvent (p.23, Section 2.5.1; p.41, Section 3.7, PBS solution).
Regarding Claim 9: Negahi Shirazi teaches a photoinitiator (p.41, Section 3.7).
Regarding Claim 10: Negahi Shirazi teaches that the composition contains a plurality of cells (p.46, Section 3.15.1, cell seeding).
Regarding Claims 11-12: Negahi Shirazi teaches cell-derived products such as the nuclei of dead cells (p.46, Section 3.15.2).
Regarding Claim 13: Negahi Shirazi teaches growth factors (p.19, para. 1), and pharmaceutically active proteins (p.100, para. 1).
Regarding Claim 14: Negahi Shirazi teaches imaging agents such as 4' 6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (p.46, Section 3.15.2).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Negahi Shirazi ("Polymer Crosslinking: a new Strategy to Enhance Mechanical Properties and Structural Stability of Bioactive Glasses", The University of Sydney, March 2015) in view of Mariappan et al (Influence of silver on the structure, dielectric and antibacterial effect of silver doped bioglass-ceramic nanoparticles, 2017, Ceramics International, Vol. 43, p.2196-220) and Chen et al (A new sol-gel process for producing Na2O-containing bioactive glass ceramics, 2010, Acta Biomaterialia, Vol. 6, p.4143-4153).
Negahi Shirazi and Mariappan teach the limitations of claim 5, as set forth above. However, Negahi Shirazi and Mariappan are silent to the bioactive glass containing oxides of sodium, potassium, or aluminum.
Chen teaches a bioactive glass containing sodium oxide (p.4143, Abstract), wherein the Na2O-containing bioglass displayed an optimal combination of mechanical properties and biodegradability compared to a glass not containing Na2O (p.4152, Conclusions). Chen and Negahi Shirazi are analogous art because they are directed toward the same field of endeavor, namely bioactive glass compositions for bone repair. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate sodium oxide into the bioactive glass of Negahi Shirazi in order to improve the mechanical strength and biodegradability of the bioactive glass.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Negahi Shirazi ("Polymer Crosslinking: a new Strategy to Enhance Mechanical Properties and Structural Stability of Bioactive Glasses", The University of Sydney, March 2015) in view of Mariappan et al (Influence of silver on the structure, dielectric and antibacterial effect of silver doped bioglass-ceramic nanoparticles, 2017, Ceramics International, Vol. 43, p.2196-220).
Negahi Shirazi teaches a biomaterial containing a methacrylated polymer (GelMA) and bioactive glass, wherein the bioactive glass is chemically attached to the GelMA (p.vi, Abstract). Negahi Shirazi further teaches the incorporation of ionic silver into ceramic materials (p.20, para. 3) but does not specifically teach a silver-containing bioactive glass.
Mariappan teaches a silver-containing bioglass (p.2196, Abstract), It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate silver into the bioactive glass taught by Negahi Shirazi in order to impart it with antibacterial properties and prevent infection.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAITLIN N ILLING whose telephone number is (571)270-1940. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4PM.
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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at (571)272-1197. 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.
/C.N.I./Examiner, Art Unit 1767
/MARK EASHOO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1767
Prosecution Insights