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 without traverse of Group I: Claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 5/22/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 9-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Greenspan et al. (US 6,756,060).
With respect to Claim 1, Greenspan teaches a wound dressing (Column 3, Lines 1-3; Column 15, Line 29), comprising: a conformable matrix, comprising: collagen, bioactive glass; and an additive comprising at least one of cellulose or alginate (Column 3, Lines 1-3; Column 6, Lines 46-48; Column 7, Lines 18-42).
With respect to Claim 4, the examiner notes that claim 1 requires either cellulose or alginate, and therefore alginate is not necessarily required by the claims. Greenspan teaches that the additive comprises cellulose (see the rejection above; Column 7, Lines 31-42). However, it is noted that Greenspan further teaches that alginate may be included in the conformable matrix (Column 12, Lines 42-44).
With respect to Claims 6 and 8, Greenspan teaches that the conformable matrix may comprise a gel, sponge, scaffold, or sheet/film (C(column 6, Lines 48-48; Column 7, Lines 18-37) and be disposed in or within a carrier, such that the matrix is disposed on a wound dressing (Column 7, Lines 18-37; Column 15, Line 29).
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 7 is 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 Greenspan
With respect to Claim 7, Greenspan teaches that the conformable matrix may have a pH greater than 7.3, thereby preventing bacteria growth and reducing inflammation (Column 3, Lines 39-45; Column 8, Lines 42-52; Column 8, Lines 55-64; Column 9, Lines 35-46; Column 13, Lines 6-22; Column 14, Lines 30-63).
However, in the event that this interpretation is not clearly envisaged by Applicant, Greenspan clearly suggests that the addition of bioactive glass reduces inflammation (Column 7, Lines 9-17) and prevents bacterial growth by increasing the pH level (Column 3, Lines 39-45; Column 8, Lines 42-52; Column 8, Lines 55-64; Column 9, Lines 35-46; Column 13, Lines 6-22; Column 14, Lines 30-63). For example, Greenspan suggests that a pH of 7.6 is effective as an anti-bacterial solution (Column 9, Lines 38-42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to provide bioactive glass in a quantity that raises the pH above 7.3 (for example to a level such as 7.6), as suggested by Greenspan, in order to provide a well-known means for reducing inflammation and preventing bacteria growth in the wound dressing.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenspan in view of Kenny (US 2018/0325740).
With respect to Claims 2 and 3, Greenspan teaches that the wound dressing comprises cellulose (Column 7, Lines 31-42), but is silent to the specific type of cellulose used. Greenspan, therefore, does not specifically teach the use of oxidized cellulose (Claim 2), or more specifically, oxidized regenerated cellulose (Claim 3).
However, oxidized regenerated cellulose is an extremely well-known type of cellulose for use in a wound dressing. For example, Kenny teaches a wound dressing (paragraphs [0001], [0020], [0025] and [0056]) comprising collagen and cellulose (paragraphs [0029], [0099], and [0101]). Specifically, the cellulose may be chosen from a variety of art-established cellulose materials, including oxidized regenerated cellulose (paragraphs [0029], [0099], and [0101]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Greenspan’s wound dressing to use oxidized regenerated cellulose as the cellulose material, as suggested by Kenny, in order to provide a well-known cellulose material for use in a wound dressing.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenspan in view of McCarthy et al. (US 2009/0130186).
With respect to Claim 5, Greenspan teaches the wound dressing for use with wounds or burns of claim 1, but does not specifically teach that the conformable matrix further comprises glycerol.
McCarthy teaches a wound dressing for use treating a wound or burn (paragraph [0002]), wherein inclusion of Glycerol in the matrix provides increased absorption and swelling [0085]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Greenspan’s wound dressing to include glycerol in the conformable matrix, as suggested by McCarthy, in order to increase absorption and swelling capacity of the dressing.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Day (US 2006/0233887) teaches a wound dressing comprising a conformable matrix of collagen, bioactive glass, and cellulose or alginate.
Banker (US 5,780,618) teaches an oxidized cellulose material used to form films, gels, or carriers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Philip R Wiest whose telephone number is (571)272-3235. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 EST.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/PHILIP R WIEST/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights