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 .
Summary
Claims 1-9 are pending in this office action. All pending claims are under examination in this application.
Priority
The current application was filed on April 2, 2024. The current application claims foreign priority to CN202410173535.2 filed February 7, 2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
Receipt of the Information Disclosure Statement filed on January 20, 2025 is acknowledged. A signed copy of the document is attached to this office action.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-9 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 2-9 have the text “Claim” capitalized within the sentence. The text should be lower case since it appears within the middle of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (CN114538452A) in view of Feral-Martin (US2021/0230008A1) and Valero et al. (US2011/0263784A1).
[The Examiner is going to introduce each new reference and then combine them where appropriate to reject the instant claims.]
1. Wu et al.
Wu et al. is considered the closest prior art as it teaches silica wet gel with narrow particle size distribution and preparation method and application thereof
(see title). In addition, Wu et al. disclose that the invention belongs to the technical field of silicon dioxide preparation, and provides silicon dioxide wet gel with narrow particle size distribution and a preparation method and application thereof, and the preparation method comprises the following steps: S1, preparing a sodium silicate solution and a sulfuric acid solution; s2, adding a sodium sulfate solution, heating, dropwise adding a sulfuric acid solution until the pH value is 1.2-2.6, dropwise adding acid and alkali at the same time, and keeping the reaction pH value to be 1.2-2.6; s3, adding sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate when the sodium silicate solution is added to 6 m3; s4, adding polyethylene glycol when the sodium silicate solution is added to 12 m3; s5, when the sodium silicate solution is added to 27 m3, stopping dropwise adding the sodium silicate solution and the sulfuric acid solution; and S6, carrying out wet grinding, washing and packaging treatment to obtain the silicon dioxide wet gel. The prepared silicon dioxide wet gel particles are uniform in particle size distribution and small in particle size, the toothpaste prepared from the silicon dioxide wet gel particles is moderate in gravel feeling, appropriate in consistency, fine and smooth in toothpaste body and smooth in taste, and the performance quality of toothpaste products is improved (see abstract).
2. Feral-Martin
Feral-Martin teaches silica for oral care compositions (see title). Furthermore, Feral-Martin discloses a precipitated silica is provided having high compatibility with stannous and fluoride ions and good balance of abrasion properties. A precipitated silica characterised by a CTAB surface area ScrAB comprised between 5 and 50 m2/g; an abrasion value Hm between 3.5 and 14.0 mm; and a stannous ion compatibility of at least 40% (see abstract).
3. Valero et al.
Valero et al. teach a method of preparing silicas, silicas with specific pore-size and/or particle-size distributions, and the uses thereof, in particular for reinforcing polymers (see title). Additionally, Valero et al. disclose that the invention relates to a novel method of preparing silicas and to highly-structured silicas having the following characteristics: a specific surface area CTAB (ScrAB) of between 40 and 525 m2g/g; a specific surface area BET (SBEr) of between 45 and 550 m2g; an object size distribution width Ld ((d84-D16)/d50), which is measured by XDC particle size analysis after deagglomeration with ultrasound, of at least 0.91; and a pore-size distribution such that ratio V(d5-d50)/V(d5-d100) is at least 0.66. The invention also relates to the use of said silicas as polymer reinforcing fillers (see abstract).
Combination of Wu et al., Feral-Martin, and Valero et al.
Regarding instant claim 1, Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. teach a preparation method for silicon dioxide. The necessary citations of Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. that pertain to instant claim 1 are presented in Table I.
Table I
Instant Claim 1
Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. Citations
A preparation method for silicon dioxide, comprising the following steps:
Wu et al. disclose a preparation method for making silicon dioxide comprising the steps of: (see claim 1 within Wu et al.)
providing a sodium silicate solution and a sulfuric acid solution; preparing a silicon dioxide solution: adding water accounting for 45-60 wt% of a total system into a reaction tank, heating the water to 40-60 °C, and dropwise adding the sulfuric acid solution to the water and stirring at the same time at a rate of 350-500 rpm until pH reaches 0.5-3.0;
1) providing a sodium silicate solution and a sulfuric acid solution
2) adding water accounting for 45-60 wt% of a total system into a reaction tank, heating to 50-55°C, and dropwise adding the sulfuric acid solution to the water and stirring at the same time until pH reaches 1.2-2.6.
(see claim 1; S1 and S2 within Wu et al.)
A skilled artisan (POSITA; person having ordinary skill in the art) would stir the mixture at the appropriate rpm. Additionally, 45-60 wt% water would be added to the reaction tank based on a skilled artisans (POSITA) knowledge of what is a suitable volume for a reactor (further in-line with the molarities of the reactants).
then, dropwise adding the sodium silicate solution and the sulfuric acid solution to the water for 1-1.5 hrs until the sodium silicate solution accounts for 30-45wt% of the total system and the sulfuric acid solution accounts for 8-15wt% of the total system, wherein the sodium silicate solution and the sulfuric acid solution are dropwise added at a constant rate, pH in the reaction tank is 0.5-3.0, and a temperature in the reaction tank is 40-60 °C; then, aging and stirring at a rate of 350-500 rpm for 30-60min, and after aging and stirring, adjusting the final pH to 2-5 with the sodium silicate solution, thus obtaining the silicon dioxide solution; and preparing solid silicon dioxide: filter-pressing and washing the silicon dioxide solution with water to obtain a filter cake, drying and crushing the filter cake, and sieving the filter cake to obtain silicon dioxide.
3) then, dropwise adding the sodium silicate solution and the sulfuric acid solution at a constant rate with the pH of the reaction tank being 1.2-2.6, and a temperature in the reaction tank is 50-55°C
4) filter-pressing and washing the silicon dioxide solution with water to obtain silicon dioxide.
(see claim 1; S3-S6 within Wu et al.)
The resulting concentrations of sodium silicate and sulfuric acid would dictate the overall wt% within the mixture. A skilled artisan (POSITA) would prepare the suitable solutions and stir the mixture at the appropriate rpm over a designated time and addition rate of sulfuric acid.
The subject matter of instant claim 1 differs from this known method in that an aging step is present after step 3) and in that step 4) is followed by drying and crushing the filter cake and sieving the filter cake to obtain silicon dioxide.
However, both Feral-Martin and Valero et al. insert an aging step within their methods for preparing silicon dioxide.
Feral-Martin discloses a method for making silicon dioxide comprising adding sodium silicate and sulfuric acid to a reaction tank and keeping the pH constant, followed by a step of aging and stirring, then adjusting the pH at a value between 3 and 5, and finally filtration [a filter-pressing step and a washing step to obtain a filter cake which is then dried and crushed] (see claim 8 and paragraphs [0030-0035] within Feral-Martin).
Valero et al. also disclose a method for making silicon dioxide comprising adding sodium silicate and sulfuric acid to a reaction tank and keeping the pH constant in a range from 2-5, followed by a step of aging and stirring, then filtration [a filter-pressing step and a washing step to obtain a filter cake which is then dried and crushed] (see claims 28-30 within Valero et al.).
The addition of an aging step at the appropriate point of the preparation process would therefore be within the scope of a skilled artisan (POSITA).
A skilled artisan (POSITA) would dry, crush, and sieve the filter cake to obtain silicon dioxide. These are all standard operating procedures within process chemistry.
Therefore, a skilled artisan (POSITA) would consult the disclosures of Wu et al., Feral-Martin, and Valero et al. to teach all the elements of instant claim 1.
The remainder of the instant claims which are either directly or indirectly dependent on claim 1 are taught in full by the combination of Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al.
Regarding instant claim 2, Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. teach wherein the sodium silicate solution has a concentration of 0.50-1.50 mol/L. Wu et al. disclose wherein the sodium silicate solution has a concentration of 0.8-1.8 mol/L (see paragraph [n0013] within Wu et al.).
Regarding instant claim 3, Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. teach wherein the sodium silicate solution is prepared by: adding solid sodium silicate into a reactor, then adding hot water and steam to liquefy the solid sodium silicate to obtain a concentrated sodium silicate solution and adding water to the concentrated sodium silicate solution to dilute the concentrated sodium silicate solution to obtain the sodium silicate solution. Feral-Martin discloses a preparation method for silicon dioxide (see Example 1 within Feral-Martin). The modification of process chemistry for instant claim 3 is within the scope of a skilled artisan (POSITA) for solubilizing (hot water/steam) the sodium silicate.
Regarding instant claim 4, Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. teach wherein the sulfuric acid solution has a concentration of 2.00-8.00 mol/L. Wu et al. disclose wherein the sulfuric acid solution has a concentration of 3-4 mol/L (see paragraph [0013] within Wu et al.).
Regarding instant claims 5 and 6, Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. teach wherein during the preparation process of the solid silicon dioxide, a salt content of the filter cake obtained by filter-pressing and washing is controlled to be less than or equal to 5wt% and wherein during the preparation process of the solid silicon dioxide, after the filter cake is dried, a loss on drying at 105 °C of the silicon dioxide is controlled to be 20-25%. Valero et al. disclose drying of the filter cake (see paragraph [0044] within Valero et al.). The modification of process chemistry for instant claims 5 and 6 are within the scope of a skilled artisan (POSITA) for drying the filter cake [temperature and water loss]. Furthermore, the amount of salt content would be a function of washing the filter cake prior to drying.
Regarding instant claim 7, Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. teach wherein during the preparation process of the solid silicon dioxide, a particle size of silicon dioxide particles obtained after crushing and sieving of the filter cake is controlled to be 14-19 μm, and a content of 325-mesh undersize particles is greater than or equal to 98%. Wu et al. disclose the silica particle sizes are: D10 3-6 mm, D50 8-15 mm, D90 20-25 mm, and a water content of 40%-60%, making it suitable for toothpaste preparation. The modification of process chemistry for instant claim 7 is within the scope of a skilled artisan (POSITA). The resulting particle size is a function of the crushing and sieving of the filter cake to obtain the desired material.
Regarding instant claim 8, Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. teach using the silicon dioxide according to instant claim 1 as an abrasive. Please see the discussion and citations within instant claim 1. Feral-Martin discloses using the silicon dioxide as an abrasive (see paragraphs [0015] and [0017] within Feral-Martin).
Regarding instant claim 9, Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. teach wherein a content of the silicon dioxide in the toothpaste is 1-30%. Feral-Martin discloses wherein a content of the silicon dioxide in the toothpaste is 5-60% wt (see paragraph [0062] within Feral-Martin).
Analogous Art
The Wu et al., Feral-Martin and Valero et al. references are directed to the same field of endeavor as the instant claims, that is, a preparation method for silicon dioxide as disclosed within instant claim 1.
Obviousness Analysis
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the silicon dioxide toothpaste composition disclosed by Wu et al., using the teachings of Feral-Martin and Valero et al. in order to arrive at the subject matter of the instant claims.
The Wu et al., Feral-Martin, and Valero et al. references all have considerable overlap for a silicon dioxide toothpaste composition. In this instance, Wu et al. supplies the generic outline for the overall preparation process, while Feral-Martin and Valero et al. supply preparation processes with additional aging steps. All references are directed to the preparation of a silicon dioxide toothpaste composition and therefore constitute analogous art under MPEP §2141.01(a). A POSITA would have reasonably consulted the three references when seeking to develop a method for the preparation of a silicon dioxide toothpaste composition.
Starting with Wu et al., the skilled person only had to try the necessary claim limitations disclosed by Feral-Martin and Valero et al. The combination of Wu et al., Feral-Martin, and Valero et al. would allow one to arrive at the present application without employing inventive skill. This combination of the silicon dioxide toothpaste composition taught by Wu et al. along with the use of the necessary claim limitations taught by Feral-Martin and Valero et al. would allow a research and development scientist (POSITA) to develop the invention taught in the instant application. It would have only required routine experimentation to modify the silicon dioxide toothpaste composition disclosed by Wu et al. with the use of the necessary claim limitations taught by Feral-Martin and Valero et al. Incorporating the disclosure of Wu et al. into the silicon dioxide toothpaste composition taught by Feral-Martin and Valero et al. represents a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions, consistent with MPEP §2143 and KSR.
Furthermore, the additional claim limitations taught by Feral-Martin and Valero et al. would have been viewed by a POSITA as routine design optimizations or known modifications for a silicon dioxide toothpaste composition. Implementing these features in Wu et al.’s silicon dioxide toothpaste composition would not require more than ordinary skill or routine experimentation.
Accordingly, the combination of Wu et al., supplemented by Feral-Martin and Valero et al. provides all the elements of the claimed invention. The resulting silicon dioxide toothpaste composition constitutes no more than the predictable outcome of combining familiar prior art components, and therefore the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN W LIPPERT III whose telephone number is (571)270-0862. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Robert A Wax can be reached on 571-272-0623. 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 W LIPPERT III/Examiner, Art Unit 1615
/Robert A Wax/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1615