Detailed Office Action
The communication dated 5/25/2026 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1, 2, 5, and 6 are pending.
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 with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 5/25/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no burden. This is not found persuasive because the restriction was done on the basis of unity of invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 5, and 6 are would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The EPO rewrote claim 2 as follows which would overcome the art rejection below:
PNG
media_image1.png
102
716
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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, 2, 5, and 6 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.
As for claim 1, the applicant claims a total concentration of “2.5 to 17.5%. It is not clear if this is by weight, by volume, or by moles. For the purpose of examination the Examiner interprets the claim as by weight based on the instant specification [pg. 8 lines 31-32].
In the claim “by adding” line 5 seems to suggest that the defibration is caused by the addition of NaOH.
The Examiner suggest the following language:
“adding an alkali metal hydroxide to the raw cellulose so as to achieve a total concentration of 2.5 to 17.5% by weight and performing a defibration step of defibrating the raw cellulose to obtain a cellulose fine fiber”
Claims 2, 5, and 6 depend from claim 1 and are similarly rejected.
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2018/0334696 BEHABTU et al., hereinafter BEHABTU.
As for claim 2, the applicant uses the language that the type 2 cellulose is “obtained by the manufacturing method . . . according to claim 1”. As written this reads as product by process. Therefore a type II unmodified cellulose fine fiber product could be obtained by a differing method. BEHABTU discloses a type II cellulose with a DP of 10 to 100 [claim 2]. BEHABTU discloses that it can be molded [0166].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY J CALANDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:45 AM -4:15 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571)270-7457. 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.
ANTHONY J. CALANDRA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1748
/Anthony Calandra/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights