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 of claims 1-17 in the reply filed on November 25, 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because”
3.1. They do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: Numeral reference “1” is mentioned in the specification, but reference “1” is not in any of the drawings; and
3.2. They include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: A. Letter “A” is shown in Figure 1; however, reference A is not mentioned in the specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. 37 CFR 1.72.
The following title is suggested: “A structure comprising coupled nanoparticles” or similar title to that concept.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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.
Claims 1-17 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 YUKIHARU (JP-2015-103609),
Claim 1: Yukiharu teaches a structure comprising multiple nanoparticles that are coupled to each other in a beaded shape. See Yukiharu, abstract and Figure 1. The structure is expected to be capable of dissolving in tetrahydrofuran solvent and precipitating under an ultrasonic condition because the structure taught by Yukiharu is substantially identical to that of the claimed structure as discussed in subsequent claims below. Thus, Yukiharu either anticipates the claim or the claim as a whole would have been prima-facie obvious.
Claims 2-4: Yukiharu teaches the multiple nanoparticles being coupled to each other via polymer-chain crosslinking and covalently bonded to the polymer chain (translation copy, pages 3-4).
Claims 5-6: The packing density of the nanoparticles in the structure appear to be lower than 74% or lower than 34% in volume. See Yukiharu, figures 1-3.
Claims 7-8: The particle diameter of the nanoparticles (the core) is about 1 to 10 nm which meets the claimed range of less than 11 nm (claim 7) and overlaps the claimed range of less than 7 nm (claim 8). See Yukiharu, translation copy, pae 3, last paragraph.
Claims 9-10: The polymer chain is bonded to the nanoparticles via a linker comprising a silyl group (i.e. silane coupling agent) (Yikiharu, translation copy, page 5, 5th and 6th paragraphs).
Claims 11-13: The structure comprises nanoparticles crosslinked by an amphipathic molecule which is an amino acid molecule (translation copy, page 3, last paragraph) or a polyalkylene glycol (Yukiharu, translation copy, page 5, second paragraph).
Claim 14: The organic silane compound functions as a surfactant and thus preventing agglomeration of the nanoparticles to each other (Yukiharu, page 5, 5th and 6th paragraphs and figures 1 and 3).
Claims 15-17: The nanoparticles include metal oxide such as oxide of silicon or aluminum (Yukiharu, translation copy, page 3, 4th paragraph).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOA (Holly) LE whose telephone number is (571)272-1511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 10:00 am to 7:00 pm.
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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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.
HOA (Holly) LE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1788
/HOA (Holly) LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights