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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Double Patenting Rejections, these rejections are withdrawn due to the approval of Terminal Disclaimers filed 1/22/2026.
Regarding rejections under 35 USC 103 in view de Hann and Kozubal, the arguments regarding the meaning of “textile” are not found persuasive. However, due do the error in 314 g /cm2 conversion to MPa in the previous office action, these rejections are withdrawn.
Regarding rejections under 35 USC 103 in view of Wang, Applicant’s arguments are not found persuasive. Applicant argues that Wang discloses “applying an aqueous solution of 20% by weight glycerin to the mats” does meet the claimed “fungal biomass: polymer loading ratio”. Examiner notes that the instant specification appear to recite a polymer: fungal biomass loading ratio, not a fungal biomass: polymer loading ratio. See rejection under 35 USC 112(b) below.
Applicant argues that none of the materials of Wang meet the claimed polymer. Wang teaches applying plasticizers and humectants are well-known in the art, such as polyethylene glycol and fat liquor [0242] an aqueous solution of 20% by weight glycerin to the mats and a solution of a 10% by weight non-sulfated fat liquor in water, [0318]. Wang teaches plasticizer such as fat liquor (e.g. Trupon ® AMC and DXV from Trumpler), vegetable glycerin or coconut oil was added to dye solution, [0344]. Examiner notes the exact formulation of the fat liquor is not disclosed by the supplier, the claimed “polymer” is at least met by the polyethylene glycol of Wang.
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 81-110 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 81 recites “fungal biomass: polymer loading ratio is from about 10:90 to about 40:60” rendering the claim indefinite. Examiner notes that the instant specification appear to recite a polymer: fungal biomass loading ratio, not a fungal biomass: polymer loading ratio. For example, the instant specification, pg. 53, discloses placing inactivated biomats in a solution of 5 or 10 wt% PVA (polyvinyl alcohol polymer). Fig. 13 and 14 of the instant specification give values of 7-75 wt% polymer, while Fig. 15-18 give 0-25 wt% PVA (polymer) with only a single data point above 60 wt% polymer in all the data. As currently claimed, only values of 60-90 wt% polymer are claimed. For purposes of examination, the claims will be understood to recite a polymer: fungal biomass loading ratio.
Claims 82-110 are rejected due to each claim’s dependence on claim 81.
Claims 87-89 recite “comprising from about 20 wt. %.... inactivated fungal biomass” rendering the claim indefinite. Examiner notes that a final product that is only 20 wt% fungal biomass does not appear to be disclosed in the instant specification and it is not clear if the moisture content is included in this value. Example 11 of the instant specification states:
The size-reduced fungal biomasses were prepared as follows: water and thawed (previously frozen) processed biomass were added to a Vitamix blender in a 1:1 mass ratio. These were blended together for approximately 2 minutes to produce a homogenous mixture of size-reduced biomass in water. Separately, a solution of water, glycerol, chitosan, citric acid, and hydrochloric acid was prepared, with the respective components in a mass ratio of 200 : 17.5 : 6.3 : 1 : 13.5 respectively. The total mass of solution was equal to that of the biomass-water blended mixture. Once the chitosan was dissolved, the aqueous polymer solution and the biomass-water mixture were combined. The newly formed mixture was stirred under heat for approximately 30 min such that a homogenous paste was formed. This paste was then cast into a flat nonstick tray and allowed to dry at ambient conditions. Once dried, the newly formed sheet material was heat pressed at 100 °C for 10 minutes.
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner notes that the claimed final product (i.e. “textile composition”) would be the above ingredients with the water removed by the drying process. As calculated above, the textile composition is 72 wt % fungal biomass when dried and heat pressed as disclosed in the instant specification, assuming all water is removed. Although some water may remain after the drying process, it is not clear where a 20 wt% fungal biomass is achieved in any example of the instant specification. It appears that claims 87-89 are reciting wt% amounts in a method before drying. Examiner suggests clarifying claims 87-89 to include whether the wt% values are before or after a drying step.
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.
Claim(s) 81-89, 93-106, 108-110 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2022/0007777).
Regarding claim 81, Wang teaches textile composition, comprising:
a. an inactivated fungal mycelial biomass; (living or dried cultivated mycelium material is processed using one or more solutions that function to remove waste material and water from the mycelium [0239]) b. a polymer; (applying plasticizers and humectants such as polyethylene glycol and fat liquor [0242]) the textile composition has a tensile strength of at least about 3 MPa. (the processed mycelium material may have an initial modulus of at least 20 MPa, [0272])
Wang does not explicitly teach polymer loading ratio of about 10:90 to about 40:60.
Wang teaches applying plasticizers and humectants are well-known in the art, such as polyethylene glycol and fat liquor [0242] an aqueous solution of 20% by weight glycerin to the mats and a solution of a 10% by weight non-sulfated fat liquor in water, [0318]. Wang teaches plasticizer such as fat liquor (e.g. Trupon ® AMC and DXV from Trumpler), vegetable glycerin or coconut oil was added to dye solution, [0344]. Examiner notes the exact formulation of the fat liquor is not disclosed by the supplier, the claimed “polymer” is at least met by the polyethylene glycol of Wang.
Further, it has been held that, when the general conditions are known in the art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges through routine experimentation (MPEP §2144.05(II)a). Further, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed range or any unexpected results arising therefrom and it has been held that where patentability is said to be based upon a particular chosen dimension or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen dimension is critical (MPEP §2144.05(II)a).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the amount of polymers in Wang to meet the claimed about 10:90 to about 40:60, in order to improve preserving and tanning properties, see [0261].
Regarding claim 82, Wang teaches polymer loading ratio is between from about 10:90 to about 30:70. (Wang teaches polyethylene glycol and fat liquor [0242] applying an aqueous solution of 10% by weight non-sulfated fat liquor in water to the mats [0318]).
Regarding claim 83, Wang does not teach polymer loading ratio is between from about 15:85 to about 25:75.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the amount of polymers in Wang to meet the claimed about 15:85 to about 25:75 in order to improve preserving and tanning properties, see [0261].
Regarding claim 84, Wang does not explicitly teach the claimed wherein the polymer comprises two or more polymers.
Wang teaches applying plasticizers and humectants are well-known in the art, such as polyethylene glycol and fat liquor [0242] an aqueous solution of 20% by weight glycerin to the mats and a solution of a 10% by weight non-sulfated fat liquor in water, [0318]. Wang teaches plasticizer such as fat liquor (e.g. Trupon ® AMC and DXV from Trumpler), vegetable glycerin or coconut oil was added to dye solution, [0344]. Examiner notes the exact formulation of the fat liquor is not disclosed by the supplier, the claimed “polymer” is at least met by the polyethylene glycol of Wang.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine a second polymer of Wang to improve flexibility of the product, see [0344].
Regarding claim 85, Wang meets the claimed, wherein the polymer is selected from synthetic polymers, (polyethylene glycol [0242]) biopolymers, and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 86, Wang does not explicitly teach the claimed wherein the polymer further comprises a synthetic polymer. (polyethylene glycol [0242])
Regarding claim 87, Wang is silent on the claimed comprising from about 20 wt. % to about 40 wt. % inactivated fungal biomass.
Wang teaches the processed mycelium material will have different absorption properties measured as a percentage mass increase after soaking in water, where the mass increases 74% or less than 92%, see [0277]. Wang teaches the product can be assembled with sheet 170, including using adhesives [0305].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the amount of moisture and included backing layers to the fungal biomass of Wang to achieve the claimed from about 20 wt. % to about 40 wt. % inactivated fungal biomass in order to optimize the flexibility of the material, [0295].
Regarding claim 88, Wang is silent on the claimed comprising from about 20 wt. % to about 30 wt. % inactivated fungal biomass.
Wang teaches the processed mycelium material will have different absorption properties measured as a percentage mass increase after soaking in water, where the mass increases 74% or less than 92%, see [0277]. Wang teaches the product can be assembled with sheet 170, including using adhesives [0305].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the amount of moisture and included backing layers to the fungal biomass of Wang to achieve the claimed from about 20 wt. % to about 30 wt. % inactivated fungal biomass in order to optimize the flexibility of the material, [0295].
Regarding claim 89, Wang is silent on the claimed comprising from about 20 wt. % to about 25 wt. % inactivated fungal biomass.
Wang teaches the processed mycelium material will have different absorption properties measured as a percentage mass increase after soaking in water, where the mass increases 74% or less than 92%, see [0277]. Wang teaches the product can be assembled with sheet 170, including using adhesives [0305].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the amount of moisture and included backing layers to the fungal biomass of Wang to achieve the claimed from about 20 wt. % to about 25 wt. % inactivated fungal biomass in order to optimize the flexibility of the material, [0295].
Regarding claim 94, Wang meets the claimed having a tensile strength of at least about 10 MPa. (the processed mycelium material may have an initial modulus of at least 20 MPa, [0272]).
Regarding claim 95, Wang meets the claimed textile material of claim 81, having a tensile strength of at least about 15 MPa. (the processed mycelium material may have an initial modulus of at least 20 MPa, [0272]).
Regarding claim 96, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed having a flexural rigidity of no more than about 10 gram-centimeters.
Wang taches mycelium material is produced, can be tailored to provide the desired characteristics for and resulting from the above-described additional processing, results in a more including more flexible or rigid material, [0295]. Wang teaches the claimed initial modulus of at least 3 MPa, in teaching at least 20 MPA, [0272].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the flexural rigidity of Wang to meets the claimed no more than about 10 gram-centimeters in order to create products such as shoe upper 12, Fig. 2, that benefit from such properties, such properties may allow the mycelium material to mimic or otherwise meet the expectations for the leather material from which sneakers of the depicted type were originally fabricated see Wang [0291] and [0295] .
Regarding claim 97, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed having a flexural rigidity of no more than about 5 gram-centimeters.
Wang taches mycelium material is produced, can be tailored to provide the desired characteristics for and resulting from the above-described additional processing, results in a more including more flexible or rigid material, [0295]. Wang teaches the claimed initial modulus of at least 3 MPa, in teaching at least 20 mPA, [0272].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the flexural rigidity of Wang to meets the claimed no more than about 5gram-centimeters in order to create products such as shoe upper 12, Fig. 2, that benefit from such properties, such properties may allow the mycelium material to mimic or otherwise meet the expectations for the leather material from which sneakers of the depicted type were originally fabricated see Wang [0291] and [0295].
Regarding claim 98, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed having a flexural rigidity of no more than about 2 gram-centimeters.
Wang taches mycelium material is produced, can be tailored to provide the desired characteristics for and resulting from the above-described additional processing, results in a more including more flexible or rigid material, [0295]. Wang teaches the claimed initial modulus of at least 3 MPa, in teaching at least 20 mPA, [0272].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the flexural rigidity of Wang to meets the claimed no more than about 2 gram-centimeters in order to create products such as shoe upper 12, Fig. 2, that benefit from such properties, such properties may allow the mycelium material to mimic or otherwise meet the expectations for the leather material from which sneakers of the depicted type were originally fabricated see Wang [0291] and [0295].
Regarding claim 99, Wang as modified meets the claimed textile material of claim 81, having a tear force of at least about 30 N. (Wang teaches a value of 62.3 N for the Double stitch tear max force, Table 1).
Regarding claim 100, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed textile material of claim 81, having a tear strength of at least about 10 N/mm.
Wang teaches a value of 62.3 N for the Double stitch tear max force, Table 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the tear strength of Wang to meets the claimed of at least about 10 N/mm in order to create products such as shoe upper 12, Fig. 2, that benefit from such properties, such properties may allow the mycelium material to mimic or otherwise meet the expectations for the leather material from which sneakers of the depicted type were originally fabricated see Wang [0291] and [0295].
Regarding claim 102, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed textile material of claim 81, having a strain at break of about 75% to about 275%.
Wang teaches the tensile elongation at break to be 60.87%, Table 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the strain at break of Wang to meets the claimed of 75% to about 275% in order to create products such as shoe upper 12, Fig. 2, that benefit from such properties, such properties may allow the mycelium material to mimic or otherwise meet the expectations for the leather material from which sneakers of the depicted type were originally fabricated see Wang [0291] and [0295].
Regarding claim 102, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed textile composition of claim 81, having a degree of swelling of between about 30% to about 120%.
Wang teaches 169% water absorption, Table 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to water absorption of Wang to meets the claimed 30% to about 120% in order to create products such as shoe upper 12, Fig. 2, that benefit from such properties, such properties may allow the mycelium material to mimic or otherwise meet the expectations for the leather material from which sneakers of the depicted type were originally fabricated see Wang [0291] and [0295].
Regarding claim 103, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed textile composition of claim 81, having a mass loss upon soaking of between about 20% to about 30%.
Wang teaches %mass increase after soaking in water for 1 hour will be less than 1%, less than 5%, less than 25%, less than 50%, [0277].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary mass loss upon soaking of Wang to meets the claimed of 20% to 30% in order to create products such as shoe upper 12, Fig. 2, that benefit from such properties, such properties may allow the mycelium material to mimic or otherwise meet the expectations for the leather material from which sneakers of the depicted type were originally fabricated see Wang [0291] and [0295].
Regarding claim 104, Wang as modified meets the claimed textile material of claim 81, wherein the polymer is cross- linked by a crosslinker. (Wang teaches treating with vegetable tannins [0238]).
Regarding claim 105, Wang as modified meets the claimed textile material of claim 104, wherein the crosslinker is selected from homobifunctional crosslinkers, heterobifunctional crosslinkers, photoreactive crosslinking agents, citric acid, tannic acid, suberic acid, adipic acid, succinic acid, extracted vegetable tannins, (Wang teaches treating with vegetable tannins [0238]) glyoxal, and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 106, Wang as modified meets the claimed textile material of claim 81, further comprising a non-fungal textile material backing layer. (Wang teaches interfacing 64,66 can be of a relatively rigid textile [0300], Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 108, Wang as modified meets the claimed textile material of claim 106, further comprising an adhesive for adhering the textile backing. (can be assembled with sheet 170, including using adhesives [0305]).
Regarding claim 109, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed textile material of claim 81, wherein the textile material is embossed. (allow for embossing of graphics or other functional elements using heat and pressure [0307])
Regarding claim 110, Wang as modified does not meet the claimed material of claim 81, further comprising a dye. (or can be tanned or dyed with soluble materials to resemble aniline leather [0294]).
Claim(s) 90-93 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2022/0007777) in view of Kozubal et al. (US 2019/0059431 A1).
Regarding claim 90, Wang does not explicitly teach wherein the inactivated fungal biomass has an average particle size of no more than about 75 micrometers.
Kozubal teaches size reduced particles of the filamentous fungal biomats can be between 0.01-0.10 mm (10 -100 microns) [0090]. The size reduction can occur by mechanical means such as cutting, chopping, dicing, mincing, grinding, blending, etc. or via sonication and is conducted prior to mixing with other ingredients or liquids, see [0087].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the particle size in the fungal material of Wang to be of no more than about 75 micrometers because it particle size can be optimized for particular textures, see Kozubal [0092].
Regarding claim 91, Wang not explicitly teach wherein the inactivated fungal biomass has an average particle size of no more than about 30 micrometers.
Kozubal teaches size reduced particles of the filamentous fungal biomats can be between 0.01-0.10 mm (10 -100 microns) [0090]. The size reduction can occur by mechanical means such as cutting, chopping, dicing, mincing, grinding, blending, etc. or via sonication and is conducted prior to mixing with other ingredients or liquids, see [0087].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the particle size in the fungal material of Wang to be of no more than about 30 micrometers because it particle size can be optimized for particular textures, see Kozubal [0092].
Regarding claim 92, Wang does not explicitly teach wherein the inactivated fungal biomass has an average particle size of no more than about 20 micrometers.
Kozubal teaches size reduced particles of the filamentous fungal biomats can be between 0.01-0.10 mm (10 -100 microns) [0090]. The size reduction can occur by mechanical means such as cutting, chopping, dicing, mincing, grinding, blending, etc. or via sonication and is conducted prior to mixing with other ingredients or liquids, see [0087].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary the particle size in the fungal material of Wang to be of no more than about 20 micrometers because it particle size can be optimized for particular textures, see Kozubal [0092].
Regarding claim 93, Wang is silent on the claimed textile material of claim 81, having a thickness of at least about 1 mm.
Kozubal teaches a thickness of 0.13 cm, or 1.3 mm, in first row of Table 1A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary thickness of the fungal material of Wang to be about 1 mm in order to provide a flexible product.
Claim(s) 107 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2022/0007777) in view of Hatfield (US 2013/0160328 A1).
Regarding claim 107, Wang does not meet the claimed textile material of claim 106, wherein the backing layer is selected from an acrylic textile, an alpaca textile, an angora textile, a cashmere textile, a coir textile, a cotton textile, an eisengarn textile, a hemp textile, a jute textile, a Kevlar textile, a linen textile, a microfiber textile, a mohair textile, a nylon textile, an olefin textile, a pashmina textile, a polyester textile, a pifia textile, a ramie textile, a rayon textile, a sea silk textile, a silk textile, a sisal textile, a spandex textile, a spider silk textile, a wool textile, and combinations thereof.
Wang teaches a generic textile to be a backing material, [0300].
Hatfield teaches footwear made of comfortable fabrics or textiles, including cotton [0049].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to select the cotton textile of Hatfield as the genetic textile for a shoe component of Wang because cotton is a comfortable textile, see Hatfield [0049].
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sager et al. (GB 2188135) teaches a textile sheet comprising an inacitivatited fungal biomass (Fig. 1) and bonding and curing the biomass to product a durable sheet (Col. 6, lines 15-19).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL M. ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0467. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM.
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, Sam Zhao can be reached at (571)270-5343. 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.
/MICHAEL M. ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744