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
REQUIREMENT FOR UNITY OF INVENTION
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475(a), a national stage application shall relate to one invention only or to a group of inventions so linked as to form a single general inventive concept (“requirement of unity of invention”). Where a group of inventions is claimed in a national stage application, the requirement of unity of invention shall be fulfilled only when there is a technical relationship among those inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features. The expression “special technical features” shall mean those technical features that define a contribution which each of the claimed inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art.
The determination whether a group of inventions is so linked as to form a single general inventive concept shall be made without regard to whether the inventions are claimed in separate claims or as alternatives within a single claim. See 37 CFR 1.475(e).
When Claims Are Directed to Multiple Categories of Inventions:
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475 (b), a national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories:
(1) A product and a process specially adapted for the manufacture of said product; or
(2) A product and a process of use of said product; or
(3) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and a use of the said product; or
(4) A process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process; or
(5) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process.
Otherwise, unity of invention might not be present. See 37 CFR 1.475 (c).
Group I, claim(s) 1-6, drawn to a product.
Group II, claim(s) 7-10, drawn to a method.
Group III, claim(s) 11, 12, drawn to a device.
The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons:
Groups I-III lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of a nanocatenane body having at least two interlocked rings wherein the ring structure comprises a core and shell covering said core, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Yong “Interlocked Catenane-Like Structure Predicted in Au24(SR)20: Implication to Structural Evolution of Thiolated Gold Clusters from Homoleptic Gold(I) Thiolates to Core-Stacked Nanoparticles”. Yong discloses a catenane structure (title) on a nanolevel (Title; Abstract; Page 3015, 1st column) having an interlocking ring structure (see Figure on Pg. 3015) wherein there is a gold core and covering (corresponds to claimed shell) (Abstract), and said interlocked ring chain are bonded at a joining region having a ligand on its surface, and a thiolate group on the surface of said ring (Abstract).
During a telephone conversation with Mih Suhn Koh on 4/28/26 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-6. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 7-12 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yong “Interlocked Catenane-Like Structure Predicted in Au24(SR)20: Implication to Structural Evolution of Thiolated Gold Clusters from Homoleptic Gold(I) Thiolates to Core-Stacked Nanoparticles” in view of Lee “Heterogeneous Component Au (Outer)−Pt (Middle)−Au (Inner) Nanorings: Synthesis and Vibrational Characterization on Middle Pt Nanorings with Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering
Regarding Claims 1-4, Yong discloses a catenane structure (title) on a nanolevel (Title; Abstract; Page 3015, 1st column) having an interlocking ring structure (see Figure on Pg. 3015) wherein there is a gold core (corresponds to claimed metal of instant Claim 2) and covering (corresponds to claimed shell) (Abstract), and said interlocked ring chain are bonded at a joining region having a ligand (corresponds to instant Claim 3) on its surface, and a thiolate group on the surface of said ring (corresponds to instant Claim 4) (Abstract).
However, Yong does not disclose the claimed limitation of the ring structured bodies being spaced apart from each other by a distance of 20 to 100 nm.
Lee discloses heterometallic (Au−Pt−Au) nanorings with intertwined triple rings (NITs), wherein three differently sized metal circular nanorings concentrically overlap in a single entity. The synthetic method allows one to control the component of core nanorings (Au or Pt) with a tunable gap distance. The narrow circular nanogaps between inner and outer Au rings strongly enhance the electromagnetic near-field via intraparticle coupling of localized surface plasmon resonance, which realizes surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) at the single-particle level. The resulting NIT systems are robust and may benefit the synthesis of complicated nanostructures, giving myriad applications. (Abstract). Lee makes it clear that modifying the gap distance is a known result effective variable in the art. Such that narrower nanogaps between inner and outer rings strongly enhance the electromagnetic field. As such, it would be expected for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the ring structured bodies distance spaced apart from each other, of Yong, by spacing them at a distance that enhances the electromagnetic near-field via intraparticle coupling of localized surface plasmon resonance, which realizes surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) at the single-particle level, as disclosed by Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated in doing so to obtain a system that is robust and may benefit the synthesis of complicated nanostructures as disclosed by Lee.
Regarding Claim 6, Yong in view of Lee suggests titled forms of said interlocking ring structures (Yong: Page 3019, 2nd column, Figure of three different models).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 7/30/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 5 under Yong have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yong in view of Lee.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAHSEEN KHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1140. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Saturdays 08:00AM-10:00PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 5712701547. 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.
/TAHSEEN KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 September 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights