DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims:
Claims 1-15 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 .
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 2, 6 and 8-15 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.
Regarding Claims 2, 6, and 15:
The claims use the term “preferably”. This term renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear if the limitations that follow are required by the claim or not.
Regarding Claim 8:
The claim refers to “the matter”, “the PFAS” and “the effective amount…” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these terms within the claim.
The remaining claims are indefinite as they depend from an indefinite claim.
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(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang et al (WO 2019/169177).
Regarding Claim 1:
Huang teaches the method for bioconversion of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) comprising contacting a matter comprising the PFAS (method of degrading PFAO) (see pg. 4 lines 3-7) with an effective amount of a material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi, and/or with an effective amount of an extract of a material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi (mushroom compost as mediator) (see pg. 52 lines 1-5).
Regarding Claim 2:
Huang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the matter is a liquid or a non-liquid, wherein the liquid preferably is groundwater, waste water, surface water or sub-surface water, and wherein the non-liquid preferably is soil, earth or a material from a garbage dump (see pg. 3 line 28- pg. 4 line 2).
Regarding Claim 3:
Huang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the PFAS is selected from the group consisting of: perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) (see pg. 3 lines 23-27), perfluorooctanoate (PFOA), perfluoro-n-butanoic acid (PFBA), perfluoro-n-pentanoic acid (PFPeA), perfluoro-n-hexanoic acid (PFHxA), perfluoro-n-butane sulfonate (PFBS), GenX (2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-2-(1,1,2,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropoxy)-propanoic acid, and perfluoro-n-hexane sulfonate (PFHxS).
Regarding Claim 4:
Huang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi is spent mushroom substrate (SMS) (mushroom compost) (see pg. 52 lines 1-5) and/or casing layer and the extract of the material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi is tea extracted from spent mushroom substrate (SMS) and/or from casing layer.
Regarding Claim 5:
Huang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi or extract thereof comprises further fungi and/or prokaryotes (the mushroom compost would inherently contain other fungi and/or prokaryote as it is not a sterile material). Alternatively the material includes a laccase enzyme from a fungal fermentation broth (see pg. 13 lines 1-10) which includes further fungi.
Regarding Claim 6:
Huang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein an enzyme, preferably a laccase or a peroxidase, is added to the matter comprising the PFAS, to the material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi or extract thereof, and/or to the composition resulting from the contacting of the matter comprising the PFAS with the effective amount of a material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi, and/or with the effective amount of an extract of a material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi (see pg. 13 lines 1-10).
Regarding Claim 7:
Huang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein at least about 1% of the PFAS is converted (the PFOA concentration changes by at least 1%) (see Fig 6C).
Regarding Claim 8:
Huang teaches the composition comprising the matter comprising the PFAS (method of degrading PFAO) (see pg. 4 lines 3-7) and further comprising the effective amount of a material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi, and/or further comprising the effective amount of an extract of a material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi (mushroom compost as mediator) (see pg. 52 lines 1-5). As the materials are mixed for treatment to occur the composition inherently exists.
Regarding Claim 9:
Huang teaches the composition according to claim 8, wherein the matter is a liquid or a non-liquid, wherein the liquid preferably is groundwater, waste water, surface water or subsurface water, and wherein the non-liquid preferably is soil, earth or a material from a garbage dump (see pg. 3 line 28- pg. 4 line 2).
Regarding Claim 10:
Huang teaches the composition according to claim 8, wherein the PFAS is selected from the group consisting of: perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) (see pg. 3 lines 23-27), perfluorooctanoate (PFOA), perfluoro-n-butanoic acid (PFBA), perfluoro-n-pentanoic acid (PFPeA), perfluoro-n-hexanoic acid (PFHxA), perfluoro-n-butane sulfonate (PFBS), GenX (2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-2-(1,1,2,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropoxy)-propanoic acid, and perfluoro-n-hexane sulfonate (PFHxS).
Regarding Claim 11:
Huang teaches the composition according to claim 8, wherein the material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi is spent mushroom substrate (SMS) (mushroom compost) (see pg. 52 lines 1-5) and/or casing layer and the extract of the material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi is tea extracted from spent mushroom substrate (SMS) and/or from casing layer.
Regarding Claim 12:
Huang teaches the composition according to claim 8, wherein the material colonized by edible mushroom forming fungi or extract thereof comprises further fungi and/or prokaryotes (the mushroom compost would inherently contain other fungi and/or prokaryote as it is not a sterile material). Alternatively the material includes a laccase enzyme from a fungal fermentation broth (see pg. 13 lines 1-10) which includes further fungi.
Regarding Claim 13:
Huang teaches the composition according to claim 8, further comprising an enzyme (see pg. 13 lines 1-10).
Regarding Claim 14:
Huang teaches the composition according to claim 13, wherein the enzyme is a laccase (see pg. 13 lines 1-10)and/or a peroxidase.
Regarding Claim 15:
Huang teaches the device comprising the composition according to claim 8, wherein the device preferably is a container (bioreactor) or a column (see pg. 25 lines 1-5).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Stathatou et al (US 2023/0133655) which teaches a method for the biosorption of micropollutants including PFAS (see para. 0003) comprising contacting the material with an edible mushroom forming fungi (Trametes versicolor) (see para. 0064).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAIRE A NORRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-5133. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5 F: 8-12.
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, Ramdhanie Bobby can be reached at 571-270-3240. 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.
/CLAIRE A NORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779 7/20/2026
Prosecution Insights