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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 09 March 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is, allegedly, “a technical relationship that involves the special technical feature” and that there is not a serious burden (Remarks, pp. 3-4). This is not found persuasive because although Applicant asserts that there is a special technical feature, Applicant has not indicated what technical feature he considers special. On the other hand, Claim 15, for example, does not even include a common technical feature, since Claim 1 requires an aqueous composition R, comprising three components: an alpha-sulfonated polymer, including (meth)acrylic monomers, a sulfo-carboxylic acid or its salt, and a polyfunctional compound selected from the group consisting of a polyol, a polyamine, an amino alcohol, a (polyamino)alcohol, an amino(polyalcohol), an ose, and an oside, and Claim 15 requires mixing together three components, which do not necessarily result in R, since it does not require an alpha-sulfonated polymer. Moreover, other claims (e.g. Claims 16 and 18) only require a composition comprising at least one composition nof a group consisting of polyol, polyamine, an amino alcohol, a (polyamino)alcohol, an amino(polyalcohol), an ose, or an oside, which are all well-known; the composition R is not required in these claims and are only intended use recitations without any significant patentable weight.
As to serious burden, the significant differences in scope and distinct requirements of each group raises a significant risk of the development of distinct issues of indefiniteness and enablement under 35 USC 112(a) and (b) as well as diverging issues under 35 USC 102 and 103 over the course of examination.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 14-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 09 March 2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 ,10, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, line 24, the word “substate” should be written “substrate.”
In Claim 10, the “%” sign after the number 60 has been struck out.
In Claim 11, a comma just before the period has not been struck out.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-13 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 1 recites the limitation “based on a total molar amount of sulphur IV.” The limitation is indefinite, because it is not clear how a molar amount of sulfur (IV) is determined. Claim 1 an aqueous composition R, which includes three components: an alpha-sulfonated polymer A, a sulfocarboxylic acid (or its salt), and a polyfunctional compound (i.e. one or more of a polyol, polyamine, an amino alcohol, a (polyamino)alcohol, an amino(polyalcohol, an ose, or an oside). Nowhere does Claim 1 expressly require that aqueous composition R include a sulfur (IV). Instead, Claim 1 requires that the alpha-sulphonated polymer A be prepared in water and in the presence of a sulfur (IV). Thus, Claim 1 requires the presence of sulfur (IV) to produce a component of composition R and does not clearly require that sulfur (IV) is present in aqueous composition R. Therefore, it is not clear whether a) the limitation “greater than 2% based on a total molar amount of sulfur IV” in Claim 1 confuses a reagent (sulfur IV) used in the production of a component of aqueous composition R, b) the limitation “greater than 2% based on a total molar amount of sulfur IV” is meant to imply that aqueous composition R itself requires sulfur (IV), or c) for some reason, the concentration of sulfur (IV) in the recited production step of alpha sulfonated polymer A must be considered when determining the amount of sulfocarboxylic (or its salt) in composition R. Examiner considers the limitation to include the interpretation that either a concentration (including 0%) of sulfur (IV) in aqueous composition R must be considered or the concentration of sulfur (IV) in the process for producing the alpha-sulfonated polymer A, which is a component of R, must be considered.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the application" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner considers the limitation to include the interpretation “the applying.”
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the sulphur compound is present in a molar amount of 1% to 15%.” The limitation is indefinite as ambiguous, since it is not clear where the sulphur compound is present, whether a) in aqueous composition R at the recited concentration; b) as a reagent in a process for making alpha-sulfonated polymer A, which is a component of R; or c) both. Examiner considers the limitation to refer to its presence in the recited process for making a component of alpha-sulfonated polymer A, but not necessarily in composition R; moreover, it is not clear whether the recited method for making alpha-sulfonated polymer A is also considered required steps of the overall claimed “method for preparing a composite material.” Examiner considers the broadest reasonable interpretation is that the limitation refer to its presence in the recited process for making a component of alpha-sulfonated polymer A, since that is the locus of the limitation “sulphur compound” in Claim 1, but not necessarily in composition R and that the recited method only requires applying the aqueous composition, including the three distinct components without considering the steps of making the components required for the claimed method of using those components in aqueous composition R.
Claim 10 recites molar amounts of compound B based on a molar amount of sulfur (IV). The limitation is indefinite, because it is not clear what comparisons are required. See rejections of Claims 1 and 8 above concerning the same or similar issue.
Claims 2-13 are rejected as depending from rejected Claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art is considered to be Yoneda et al. (EP 1300426).
Regarding Claim 1, Yoneda et al. (EP’426) teach a method for making an alpha-sulfonated (terminal) (meth)acrylic acid polymer prepared in water in the absence of a phosphorous compound by polymerization of at least one (meth)acrylic acid monomer or salt thereof in the presence of at least one initiator and of at least one sulfur compound comprising sulfur (IV) (e.g. bisulfite) (Abstract; [0026,0033-0036]). The alpha-sulfonated (meth)acrylic acid polymer is used a dispersant, descaling agent, detergent builders, or in binders [0001-0002,0127]. EP’426 additionally, teaches a composition, including the alpha-sulfonated (terminal) (meth)acrylic acid polymer and polyol (e.g. polyalkylene glycol) [0146] or the alpha-sulfonated (terminal) (meth)acrylic acid polymer and amino(polyalcohol) (e.g. diethanol amine, triethanol amine) [0122], depending on the application. Moreover, EP’426 suggests that when used as a detergent builder in a detergent, components can be added to the alpha-sulfonated (meth)acrylic polymer, including an alkali component [0122] to neutralize the weakly acidic detergent and a surfactant as a main component of detergent [0134-0137]. A suggested alkali component includes amino(polyols) [0122]; a suggested surfactant, includes sulfo fatty acids (e.g. sulfo-carboxylic acids) [0137]. It would have been obvious to combine the recited components of R in Claim 1 to achieve aqueous composition R, because EP’426 suggests these components for a detergent. EP’426 fails to teach crosslinking material F, impregnated with R. No prior art, either alone or in combination with other prior art, which teaches or fairly suggests every limitation of Claim 1 has been identified as of the time of this Office Action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Witman (CA 1,331,324) (reaction product of a polymer, a polyol in presence of p-toluenesulfonic acid)
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER M WEDDLE whose telephone number is (571)270-5346. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6:30.
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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
ALEXANDER M WEDDLE
Examiner
Art Unit 1712
/ALEXANDER M WEDDLE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights