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 .
Non-Final Rejection
Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 9-10, 12, 14, 16-18, 20-21, 23-26, 28, and 31 are pending.
Claims 2, 4, 8, 11, 13,15,19, 22, 27, 29-30 are cancelled by preliminary amendment 6/13/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/12/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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)(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 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.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 14, 20-21, 24 28, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Wang et al. "Study on the microscopic mechanism and optimization of dust suppression by compounding biological surfactants" cited in Applicant’s IDS as evidenced by Rhamnolipids C10 | C16H30O7 | CID 171608186 - PubChem.
With respect to independent claim 1 method for suppressing dust with a dust suppressant composition comprising an aqueous solution of a glycolipid, Wang et al. exemplify an aqueous solution of glycolipids (sophorolipid and rhamnolipid) with water on page 4, section 2.2 copied herein and highlighted for clarity.
PNG
media_image1.png
636
846
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 1 limitation to applying an effective amount of a dust suppressant composition to an area is anticipated by Wang et al. illustrating the green degradable dust suppressant sprayed on the experimental coal dust (See pg. 10, left col, para 1) anticipating the method claim 1.
Accordingly, the exemplary teachings of Wang et al. anticipate the material limitations of the instant claims.
Alternatively, even if the broad teachings of Wang et al are not sufficient to anticipate the material limitations of the instant claims, it would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive at the claimed method of suppressing dust because Wang et al. teach on page 3, figure 1B middle chemical structure formula of rhamnolipid having 10 carbons, (see last line teaching rhamnolipid) which is also notoriously well known in the art as illustrated below by Pubchem.
PNG
media_image2.png
500
500
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 3 limitation wherein said glycolipid is according to the claimed formula Wang discloses the method of claim 1 (pg. 1, abstract) wherein said glycolipid is according to the formula listed: A- [B]a, wherein a is 1; A is a monosaccharide; and B comprises an alkyl group (Fig. 1 b middle structure listed: rhamnolipid) which is notoriously commonly known as the same as Applicant’s Figure 2A marked Rhamnolipid C10). See the Pubchem evidence for support of common knowledge.
With respect to claims 5, 7 and 9, Wang et al. teach wherein B is according to the first formula listed wherein n is 6 and R1 is H (See pg. 3, Fig. 1 - b - middle structure listed in the last line on page 3 as rhamnolipid) which is also notoriously well known in the art as Rhamnolipid C10 illustrated above by Pubchem. Wang et al. teach wherein A is rhamnose as evidenced by the Fig 1b middle structure being listed as rhamnolipid on the last line of page 3.
With respect to claim 14 Wang et al. exemplify the optimal ratio and concentration of each component are: rhamnolipid 0.129ml, lactone sophorolipid 0.044ml, Surfactin 0.029g. In this addition ratio, the settling time of the compound reagent predicted by the model after acting on the coal sample is 31.777s. See the paragraph above the conclusion on page 8. Wang et al. exemplify rhamnolipid 0.129ml, lactone sophorolipid 0.044ml, Surfactin 0.029g thus, the aqueous solution with 40 ml of purified water comprise less than about 10% w/v and less than about 1% w/v of said glycolipid.
With respect to claim 20, Wang et al. illustrate by example the green degradable dust suppressant sprayed on the experimental coal dust (See pg. 10, left col, para 1).
With respect to independent claim 21, Wang et al. teach a method for reducing formation of dust from a surface of coal (see page 7, left col., ln.1-2. Claim 21 dust suppressant composition comprises lactone sophorolipid lipid, rhamnolipid and Surfactin in the green biodegradable composite in water making it an aqueous solution of a glycolipid of the formula:
A-[B]a wherein a is 1;
A is selected from the group consisting of a monosaccharide (Rhamnose)
and B is a C6 moiety of the first formula in claim 21
PNG
media_image3.png
591
546
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein n is 6, and R1 is H. See also under (Fig. 1 - b middle structure is rhamnolipid well understood to be rhamnolipid C10 having 10 carbons) see Pubchem as evidence.
Claim 21 limitation to applying an effective amount of a dust suppressant composition to an area is anticipated by Wang et al. illustrating the green degradable dust suppressant sprayed on the experimental coal dust (See pg. 10, left col, para 1) anticipating the method claim 21. Accordingly, the exemplary teachings of Wang et al. anticipate the material limitations of the instant claims.
Alternatively, even if the broad teachings of Wang et al are not sufficient to anticipate the material limitations of the instant claims, it would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive at the claimed method of suppressing dust because Wang et al. teach on page 3, figure 1B middle chemical structure formula of rhamnolipid having 10 carbons, (see last line on page 3 teaching rhamnolipid) and further one of ordinary skill understands that Wang et al. figure 1b middle diagram contains an inadvertent error where the OH group is not drawn to the carbon of the carbonyl group and is instead inadvertently depicted off the oxygen. Examiner’s position is supported by the exemplary teaching of a dust suppressant composition of Wang et al. using the middle structure in Fig 1 cited as a Rhamnolipid which is notoriously well known and supported by Pubchem having the same structure as claimed and as in Applicant’s specification Fig 2A labeled Rhamnolipid C10.
With respect to claim 24, Wang et al. teach wherein A is rhamnose monosaccharide (see Fig 1b middle structure being listed: rhamnolipid on the last line of page 3).
With respect to claim 28 Wang et al. exemplify the optimal ratio and concentration of each component are: rhamnolipid 0.129ml, lactone sophorolipid 0.044ml, Surfactin 0.029g. In this addition ratio, the settling time of the compound reagent predicted by the model after acting on the coal sample is 31.777s. See the paragraph above the conclusion on page 8. Wang et al. exemplify rhamnolipid 0.129ml, lactone sophorolipid 0.044ml, Surfactin 0.029g thus, the aqueous solution with 40 ml of purified water comprises less than about 10% w/v and less than about 1% w/v of said glycolipid.
With respect to claim 31, Wang et al. illustrating the green degradable dust suppressant sprayed on the experimental coal dust (See pg. 10, left col, para 1).
Claims 6 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. "Study on the microscopic mechanism and optimization of dust suppression by compounding biological surfactants" evidenced by Rhamnolipids C10 | C16H30O7 | CID 171608186 - PubChem as applied to claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 14, 20-21, 24 28, 31 above, and further in view of Rivera et al. "Advances on research in the use of agro-industrial waste in biosurfactant production" cited in Applicant’s IDS.
Wang et al. are relied upon as set forth above for their teaching suppressing dust with an aqueous glycolipid composition comprising biological surfactants (pg. 1, abstract), and further teach lipopeptide biosurfactant Surfactin (see page 2, paragraph above Materials and experiments), but does not teach wherein when a is 2, B is attached to a different position of A as is required by claims 6 and 23.
In the analogous art, Rivera et al. teach on page 4, bottom of left column, Glycolipids contain different sugars linked by an ester group to linear or branched alkyl groups with rhamnolipids, trehalolipids and sophorolipids the most well-known (Fig. 2). Lipopeptides are classified as cyclic or linear compounds and consist of fatty acids combined with peptide residues with surfactin, iturin and fengysin the most well-known lipopeptide families (Fig. 3). Thus, Riveria et al. teach biological surfactants wherein when a is 2, B is attached to a different position of A (pg. 5, Fig. 2: trehalolipid).
It would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al. with the claimed biological surfactant as taught by Rivera et al. because Wang et al. teach a method of suppressing dust with glycolipids such as sophorolipids and rhamnolipids and lipopeptides biosurfactant surfactin in general and Rivera et al. guide one of ordinary skill to the claimed biological surfactants lipopeptides, such as surfactin, have exceptional biological properties and they can logically replace glycolipid type biosurfactants, such as sophorolipids and rhamnolipids. One of ordinary skill is guided to combine the teachings of Wang et al. with Rivera et al. since both are in the analogous art of using surfactants surfactin, sophorolipids and rhamnolipids in improving ionization characteristics of a mixture.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9-10, 14, 17, 20-21, 24, 25 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over CN 112812745 A to CHINA UNIVERSITY OF MINING AND TECHNOLOGY (hereinafter China) Google Patents Translation attached as evidenced by Rhamnolipid - Wikipedia and Sophorolipid - Wikipedia search notes attached.
China exemplify suppressing dust of anthracite coal samples by evenly sprinkle of the surface of the liquid coal dust settling composition comprising surfactin, sophorolipids, rhamnolipids and alkylated cellulose namely hydroxyethyl cellulose. See example 3 and claims 1-3. Also see Example 27 formulation A and [0582] teaching 0.1 wt% extract X7 glycolipid mixture with water dilution. Composition A is a concentrate which are diluted with water in a ratio (concentrate:water) in the range of 1:80 to 1:20 to give a ready-to-use solution. [0618]. Accordingly, the exemplary teachings China anticipate the material limitations of the instant claims.
Alternatively, even if the broad teachings of China are not sufficient to anticipate the material limitations of the instant claims, it would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive at the claimed method of suppressing dust because China exemplify suppressing dust of anthracite coal samples by evenly sprinkle of the surface of the liquid coal dust settling composition comprising surfactin, sophorolipids, rhamnolipids and alkylated cellulose namely hydroxyethyl cellulose. See example 3 and prior art claims 1-3.
With respect to claims 3, 5, 7 and 9, China teach the rhamnolipid glycolipid. See claim 1. The rhamnose monosaccharide is met by the common knowledge that the glycosyl head group of rhamnolipids is a rhamnose sugar (See Rhamnolipid - Wikipedia).
With respect to claim 10, China teach the sophorolipid glycolipid. See claim 1. One of ordinary skill understands that sophorolipids are glycolipid biosurfactants consisting of a hydrophobic fatty acid tail (typically 16 or 18 carbon atoms) and hydrophilic carbohydrate head group called sophorose which is a disaccharide derived from glucose. And thus attached Wikipedia evidence that China meets the claim 10.
The claim 14 is met by the prior art claims 1 and 6.
The alkylated cellulose of claim 17 is met by the prior art claim 3.
The claim 20 is met by the examples and abstract.
With respect to independent claim 21, China exemplify suppressing dust of anthracite coal samples by evenly sprinkle of the surface of the liquid coal dust settling composition comprising surfactin, sophorolipids, rhamnolipids and alkylated cellulose namely hydroxyethyl cellulose. See example 3 and claims 1-3. Also see Example 27 formulation A and [0582] teaching 0.1 wt% extract X7 glycolipid mixture with water dilution. Composition A is a concentrate which are diluted with water in a ratio (concentrate:water) in the range of 1:80 to 1:20 to give a ready-to-use solution. [0618]. With respect to the structure of claim 21, China teach the rhamnolipid glycolipid. See claim 1. Accordingly, the exemplary teachings China anticipate the material limitations of the instant claims.
Alternatively, even if the broad teachings of China are not sufficient to anticipate the material limitations of the instant claims, it would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive at the claimed method of suppressing dust because China exemplify suppressing dust of anthracite coal samples by evenly sprinkle of the surface of the liquid coal dust settling composition comprising surfactin, sophorolipids, rhamnolipids and alkylated cellulose namely hydroxyethyl cellulose. See example 3 and prior art claims 1-3.
The rhamnose monosaccharide of claim 24 is met by the common knowledge that the glycosyl head group of rhamnolipids is a rhamnose sugar (See Rhamnolipid - Wikipedia).
The alkylated cellulose of claim 25 is met by the prior art claim 3.
The claim 31 is met by the examples and abstract.
Claims 6 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 112812745 A to CHINA UNIVERSITY OF MINING AND TECHNOLOGY (hereinafter China) Google Patents Translation attached as evidenced by Rhamnolipid - Wikipedia and Sophorolipid - Wikipedia search notes attached as applied to claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 14, 20-21, 24 28, 31 above, and further in view of Rivera et al. "Advances on research in the use of agro-industrial waste in biosurfactant production" cited in Applicant’s IDS.
China is relied upon as set forth above for exemplifying suppressing dust of anthracite coal samples by evenly sprinkle of the surface of the liquid coal dust settling composition comprising surfactin, sophorolipids, rhamnolipids and alkylated cellulose namely hydroxyethyl cellulose. See example 3 and claims 1-3. Also see Example 27 formulation A and [0582] teaching 0.1 wt% extract X7 glycolipid mixture with water dilution. However, China does not teach wherein when a is 2, B is attached to a different position of A as is required by claims 6 and 23.
In the analogous art, Rivera et al. teach on page 4, bottom of left column, Glycolipids contain different sugars linked by an ester group to linear or branched alkyl groups with rhamnolipids, trehalolipids and sophorolipids the most well-known (Fig. 2). Lipopeptides are classified as cyclic or linear compounds and consist of fatty acids combined with peptide residues with surfactin, iturin and fengysin the most well-known lipopeptide families (Fig. 3). Thus, Riveria et al. teach biological surfactants wherein when a is 2, B is attached to a different position of A (pg. 5, Fig. 2: trehalolipid).
It would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify China with the claimed biological surfactant as taught by Rivera et al. because China teach a method of suppressing dust with glycolipids such as sophorolipids and rhamnolipids and lipopeptides biosurfactant surfactin in general and Rivera et al. guide one of ordinary skill to the claimed biological surfactants lipopeptides, such as surfactin, have exceptional biological properties and they can logically replace glycolipid type biosurfactants, such as sophorolipids and rhamnolipids. One of ordinary skill is guided to combine the teachings of China with Rivera et al. since both are in the analogous art of using surfactants surfactin, sophorolipids and rhamnolipids in improving ionization characteristics of a mixture.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over CN 112812745 A to CHINA UNIVERSITY OF MINING AND TECHNOLOGY (hereinafter China) Google Patents Translation as applied to claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9-10, 14, 17, 20-21, 24, 25 and 31 above and further in view of Pemberton et al. (WO2020163839A1).
China is relied upon as set forth above for exemplifying the suppressing of dust of anthracite coal samples by evenly sprinkle of the surface of the liquid coal dust settling composition comprising surfactin, sophorolipids, rhamnolipids and alkylated cellulose namely hydroxyethyl cellulose. See example 3 and claims 1-3. Also see Example 27 formulation A and [0582] teaching 0.1 wt% extract X7 glycolipid mixture with water dilution. However China does not exemplify the claim 12.
With respect to claim 12 wherein said disaccharide comprises 1→2, 1→4, or 1→6 linkage between two monosaccharides Pemberton et al. page 7 [0033] teach the claim 12 does not provide a contribution over the art because it is well understood that
PNG
media_image4.png
78
560
media_image4.png
Greyscale
thus, the claim 12 limitation to the definition of a disaccharide does not provide a contribution over the art of record. It would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive at the claimed method of suppressing dust because China exemplify suppressing dust of anthracite coal samples by evenly sprinkle of the surface of the liquid coal dust settling composition comprising surfactin, sophorolipids rhamnolipids and alkylated cellulose namely hydroxyethyl cellulose and Pemberton et al. establish the claim 12 disaccharide linkages are a commonly known definition of disaccharide and does not provide a contribution over the art.. One of ordinary skill is motivated to combine the teachings of China with that of Pemberton since both are in the analogous field of ionic liquids comprising monosaccharides and disaccharides.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over CN 112812745 A to CHINA UNIVERSITY OF MINING AND TECHNOLOGY (hereinafter China) Google Patents Translation as applied to claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9-10, 14, 17, 20-21, 24, 25 and 31 above.
With respect to claim 16, China is relied upon as set for above for exemplifying the dust suppressant formulated in examples 1-3 but do not teach wherein said composition is applied at a rate of between 50,000 to 600,000 gallons per km2. Examiner notes that China Example 3 copied herein:
PNG
media_image5.png
470
490
media_image5.png
Greyscale
guides one of ordinary skill to the same glycolipid composite biosurfactant selected from 0.06 percent of lactone sophorolipid and 0.09 percent of rhamnolipid; 0.04 % lipopeptide biosurfactant Surfactin ; 0.3% of sodium alginate thickening agent and 0.4% of NaCl solution; the balance being purified water which aqueous composition is uniformly applied for dust suppression in general.
It would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify China with the claimed method of applying the dust suppressant at a rate of between 50,000 to 600,000 gallons per km2 as required by the claim 16 because China guide one of ordinary skill to apply uniformly in general. One of ordinary skill is motivated to optimize the rate of application as claimed to achieve a uniform application of the same mixture glycolipid and water.
Claims 18 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 112812745 A to CHINA UNIVERSITY OF MINING AND TECHNOLOGY (hereinafter China) Google Patents Translation as applied to claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9-10, 14, 17, 20-21, 24, 25 and 31 above and further in view of Stadler et al. (US20140178444A1).
China is relied upon as set forth above, however do not teach the dust suppressant composition further comprises alkylated cellulose as required by claims 18 and 26. Specifically, China exemplify suppressing dust of anthracite coal samples by evenly sprinkle of the surface of the liquid coal dust settling composition comprising surfactin, sophorolipids rhamnolipids and alkylated cellulose namely hydroxyethyl cellulose. See example 3 and claims 1-3.
In the analogous art of glycolipids, Stadler et al. teach the equivalence of modified celluloses (preferably methylcellulose, ethylcellulose, hydroxymethyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl methylcellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose). See [0445].
It would have been obvious to one with skill in the art to modify China method of dust suppression compositions with the hydroxy propyl methyl cellulose as claimed and taught by Stadler et al. teaching the equivalence of the claimed cellulose to the alkylated hydroxyethyl cellulose exemplified by China. One of ordinary skill is motivated to combine the teachings because both are in the analogous art of glycolipid based compositions and establish that the claimed celluloses do not provide a contribution over the art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PREETI KUMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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.
/PREETI KUMAR/ Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/ANGELA C BROWN-PETTIGREW/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights