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 .
Priority
This application was filed 01/04/2024. Claims 1-10, 12, 14-16, 19-22 and 39-40 are before the Examiner.
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 1 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. Specifically, claim 1 line 12 has an extraneous period in the middle of the line. Due to this, it is unclear as to if this is the end of the claim or if this is a misprint. Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-10, 12, 14-16, 19-22 and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by USPGPub 20230270113. PGPub teaches the instant method of treating crops with a phthalimide fungicide. Phthalimide fungicides are taught in abstract, paragraphs 2, 8-12 and 112 including captan, folpet, captafol and combinations thereof. Crops to treat are taught in paragraphs 57, 60 and 332-333. The fungal diseases to be treated are taught in paragraph339. Claim 2 is taught in paragraphs 5, 34, 35 and 37. Claim 3 is taught in paragraph 339. Claim 4 in paragraphs 28, 30, 288, 295, 466 and 483. Claim 5 is taught in paragraph 483. Claim 6 is taught by paragraph 453. Claim 7 and are taught by paragraph 305. Claim 9 is taught by paragraphs 34 and 298. Claim 10 is taught by paragraphs 19 and 112. Claim 12 is taught bt paragraph 112. Claim 17 is taught by paragraphs 332, 339 and 340. Claim 15 is taught by paragraphs 44, 102, 438, 554 and 121-122. Claim 16 is taught by paragraphs 98, 102, 109, 438, 42, 47 and 558. Claim 19 is taught by paragraphs 44, 98, 102, 109,438, 442, 447, 558 and 533. Claims 20-21 are taught by paragraphs 459 and 497-498. Claim 22 is taught by paragraph 19. Claim 39 is taught by paragraphs 332-333 and 339. Claim 40 is taught by paragraphs 28, 482-83 and 495. This anticipates the instant claims.
Claims 1-10, 12, 14-16, 19-22 and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by WO2012/025912. WO teaches fungicidal compositions to treat fungal infestations on crops. The fungicide is a phthalimide fungicide. Folpet is specifically mentioned in paragraph 21. Crops covered include those taught in paragraph 36. The phytopathogenic fungi are taught in paragraphs 39-40. The rate applied is taught in paragraphs 41-43. Paragraph 49 teaches that the combination can include a suspension. Granules and their formulation is taught in paragraph 52. The advantage as taught by the Wo is that the composition has a synergistic effect which improves the quality of harvested crops.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D MARGARET M SEAMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm Eastern.
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, Andrew Kosar can be reached at 571-272-0913. 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.
/D MARGARET M SEAMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1625