Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/568,864

HUANGSHUI POLYSACCHARIDE-BASED HYDROGEL AND PREPARATION METHOD AND USE THEREOF

Non-Final OA §101§102§112
Filed
Dec 11, 2023
Examiner
PERRIN, CLARE M
Art Unit
1779
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
BEIJING TECHNOLOGY AND BUSINESS UNIVERSITY
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
492 granted / 733 resolved
+2.1% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+42.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
777
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
41.3%
+1.3% vs TC avg
§102
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
§112
30.9%
-9.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 733 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §112
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 . Claim Status The Preliminary Amendment filed on 11 December 2023 has been entered; claims 1-15 remain pending. 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. Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed recitation of a use, without setting forth any steps involved in the process, results in an improper definition of a process, i.e., results in a claim which is not a proper process claim under 35 U.S.C. 101. See for example Ex parte Dunki, 153 USPQ 678 (Bd.App. 1967) and Clinical Products, Ltd. v. Brenner, 255 F. Supp. 131,149 USPQ 475 (D.D.C. 1966) 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 1-15 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. With respect to claim 1, the limitation “Huangshui polysaccharide” renders the claims indefinite, as the scope of this limitation is unclear. According to Wu et al. (International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2022, 216, 157-171), Huangshui is the typical byproduct of traditional Chinese Baijiu fermentation, and comprises complex components containing a large amount of residual organic matter and microorganisms, from which different polysaccharides can be extracted (second to last paragraph of Introduction). Wu teaches that the polysaccharides were extracted according to the procedure disclosed in Huo et al. (Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2022, 70, 711-735: see “Extraction and Purification of Polysaccharides on Page 719), a specific extraction procedure which produces a particular purification level of polysaccharides with different structures and molecular weights (see Page 719 of Huo, see also Section 2.2 and Fig. 1 of Huo et al. (Food Resource International, 2020, 136, 109493). The Examiner notes that the extraction procedure for the Huangshui polysaccharide is not even recited in claim 10, the method for preparing the hydrogel of claim 1. For at least the foregoing reasons, the Examiner submits that the metes and bounds of “Huangshui polysaccharide” is not defined. Applicant may wish to consider reciting the extraction steps in lines 2-4 of claim 15 in claim 1. Claims 7-9 provides for a process, but, since the claim does not set forth any steps involved in the method/process of use, it is unclear what method/process applicant is intending to encompass. A claim is indefinite where it merely recites a use without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced. Regarding claim 14, the phrase "gel-like" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. Terms such as "-like" are similar to terms such as "or the like" or "and the like" which have been held to be indefinite in a claim since they extend the otherwise definite scope of terms to an indefinite scope. See Ex parte Caldwell, 1906 CD 58 (Commr. Pats. 1905); Ex parte Remark, 15 USPQ2d 1498 (BPAI 1990). With continued reference to claim 14, the limitations “immersing a gel-like product obtained in step e in solutions added with iron ions, hydroxide ions, and magnetic nanoparticles” render the claim indefinite as “in solutions” implies more than one (type of? solution in which the immersing is taking place; additionally, two immersing times are recited later in the claim, which appear to correspond with iron ion immersing and hydroxide ion immersing. Clarification is respectfully requested. With respect to claim 15, “second and subsequent centrifugation” lacks antecedent basis in the claim language. Regarding claims 2-6 and 10-13, they are rejected for being dependent on a rejected base claim. 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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2022, 216, 157-171), hereinafter “Wu”. With respect to claims 1 and 2, Wu teaches a hydrogel comprising polyvinyl alcohol, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, and Huangshui polysaccharides (Abstract), wherein three samples were prepared: m-PVA/CMC/cHSP-2 %, m-PVA/CMC/cHSP-4 %, and m-PVA/CMC/cHSP-8 % (Section 2.3), depending on the cHSP contents (2 %, 4 %, and 8 % of the gross weight of other two raw materials), wherein m-PVA/CMC/cHSP-2 % meets the limitation 100:(2.0) polyvinyl alcohol and sodium carboxymethyl cellulose: Huangshui polysaccharide, a discrete value within “100 : (1.8-2.2)” as recited in claim 2. With respect to claim 3, Wu teaches that 1.5g polyvinyl alcohol and 1.0 g sodium carboxymethyl cellulose are used (see Section 2.3), a mass ratio of 3:2, a discrete range within “(2.8-3.2) : (1.8-2.2)”, With respect to claim 4, Wu teaches that the polyvinyl alcohol, the sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, and the Huangshui polysaccharide are connected by intramolecular and/or intermolecular hydrogen bonds (see Sections 3.1, 3.2), and wherein the hydrogel has a porous structure (see Section 3.4; Fig. 2). With respect to claim 5, Wu teaches that the Huangshui polysaccharide is a brewing Huangshui polysaccharide (see Introduction: second to last paragraph and Abstract). With respect to claim 6, Wu teaches that the hydrogel matrix further comprises Fe3O4 magnetic particles (see Sections 3.2, 3.3). With respect to claims 7 and 8, Wu teaches that the hydrogel adsorbs methylene blue dye (see Abstract; Section 3.9.2). With respect to claim 9, Wu teaches that the hydrogel adsorbent adsorbs dye at temperatures ranging from 25-65°C (see Sections 3.9.2., 3.9.6); regarding the recited operating pH range, the hydrogel of Wu meets the limitations of claims 1 and 7, and is therefore capable of the recited operating pH range of 2-10 for dye adsorption. Regarding composition claims, if the composition is the same, it must have the same properties (see MPEP § 2112.01, II.). With respect to claim 10, Wu teaches a method for preparing the hydrogel according to claim 1 (see Section 2.3 for all steps), comprising the following steps: a) swelling polyvinyl alcohol in water; b) mixing a swelled polyvinyl alcohol solution with sodium carboxymethyl cellulose to obtain a uniform solution (“first mixture”), and heating and stirring the first mixture at 96°C; c) cooling the heated and stirred uniform solution (“first mixture”) to room temperature; d) mixing the cooled uniform solution (“first mixture”) with Huangshui polysaccharide to obtain a second mixture; and e) subjecting the second mixture to freezing and thawing in cycles. With respect to claim 11, Wu teaches (1) the swelling process comprises heating at 60°C (discrete value within “55-65°C”), and stirring for 0.5 h (30 minutes, a discrete value within “30-60 min”). With respect to claims 12 and 13, Wu teaches stirring for 30 minutes (discrete value within “20-40 min”) after cooling step c) and stirring for 30 minutes (discrete value within “20-40 min”) following addition of Huangshui polysaccharide (see Section 2.3). Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2022, 216, 157-171) as evidenced by Dai et al. (Carbohydrate Polymers, 2019, 209, 51-61), hereinafter “Wu” and “Dai”. With respect to claim 14, Wu teaches that the magnetic hydrogels are prepared according to the procedure taught in reference 9: Dai et al. (Carbohydrate Polymers, 2019, 209, 51-61); Dai teaches that as-prepared hydrogels were immersed into a fresh aqueous solution containing 0.1mol/L Fe2+ and 0.2mol/L Fe3+. After impregnation for 4h followed by immersed into 2mol/L NaOH solution (“hydroxide ions”) for 2h, the magnetic nanoparticles (Fe3O4) were formed inside the hydrogel networks by the coprecipitation reaction of Fe2+ and Fe3+ with inorganic bases. The hydrogels were washed thoroughly with distilled water and freeze-dried for further use (see Section 2.3). Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2022, 216, 157-171) as evidenced by Huo et al. (Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2022, 70, 711-735) and Huo et al. (Food Resource International, 2020, 136, 109493), hereinafter “Wu”, “Hou Journal of Agriculture”, and “Hou Feed Resource International”. With respect to claim 15, Wu teaches in Section 2.2 that the extraction procedure that was followed was found in Huo et al. (Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2022, 70, 711-735: see “Extraction and Purification of Polysaccharides on Page 719), the details of which are found in refs 112-114 of Hou; wherein ref 114 is Huo et al. (Food Resource International, 2020, 136, 109493). Hou Feed Resource International teaches that the extraction step of the Huangshui polysaccharide comprises subjecting brewing Huangshui to centrifugation, ultrafiltration, and alcohol precipitation and centrifugation, collecting a precipitate, and drying the precipitate (see Section 2.2: first paragraph). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARE M PERRIN whose telephone number is (571)270-5952. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F. 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, Bob Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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. /CLARE M. PERRIN/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 1779 /CLARE M PERRIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779 02 March 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 11, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600656
HIGH RATE THICKENER AND EDUCTORS THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589378
MODIFIED NANOSCALE ZERO-VALENT IRON (NZVI) AND PREPARATION METHOD AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582948
SUBMERSIBLE SYSTEM FOR PRODUCTION OF A STABILIZED GAS FLUX
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583772
SUSTAINABLE HYBRID COMPOSITE MADE FROM BIODEGRADABLE POLYMER REINFORCED WITH EXTRACTED POWDER COMPOUND FROM REJECT BRINE (EPC-RB)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570554
METHOD OF REMOVING A URANIUM SOURCE FROM A WATER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+42.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 733 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month