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 with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 7/6/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground that none of the International Search Report references teaches or suggests all the steps of claim 1. This is not found persuasive because the below rejection demonstrates that the claimed invention is obvious (no special technical feature). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 12-14 are withdrawn from further as being drawn to a nonelected invention.
Claim Objection
Claim 3 is objected to because the claim lacks a period.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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 1-11 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPAP 2021/0010198 to Stewart in view of USPAP 2018/0282529 to Kaplan-Bie.
Claim 1, Stewart discloses a process for producing leather, skin, hide and/or textile substitute from mycelium comprising the following steps: reacting mycelium with an aqueous solution comprising a surfactant and a biocide (e.g. tannins, tannic acid, and/or vegetable tannins) and reacting mycelium with an alkali (e.g. calcium hydroxide) (see entire document including [0002], [0005], [0006], [0008], [0012], [0040] and [0046]).
Stewart does not appear to specifically mention a step of soaking the mycelium in an organic solvent but Kaplan-Bie discloses a process for producing leather, skin, hide and/or textile substitute with increased strength from mycelium which includes a step of soaking mycelium in an organic solvent and reacting the mycelium with an aqueous solution comprising an inherently antimicrobial (biocide) tannic acid (see entire document including [0004], [0005], [0009], [0016]-[0019], [0082], [0088], [0090] and [0133]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include the claimed steps, including soaking the mycelium in an organic solvent, to provide a product with enhanced strength.
Claim 2, the organic solvent is selected from the group consisting of an ether solvent, an alcohol solvent, an alcohol ether solvent, and mixtures thereof ([0046] of Kaplan-Bie).
Claim 3, the surfactant is a non-ionic (e.g. polysorbate) surfactant [0040].
Claim 4, the biocide is a phenolic biocide ([0016], [0017], [0082] and [0133] of Kaplan-Bie).
Claim 5, the alkali is selected from the group consisting of alkali metal hydroxide, alkaline earth metal hydroxide, and mixtures thereof [0008].
Claim 6, said process further comprises a step of treating the mycelium with an enriching mixture and a step of treating the mycelium with an acid ([0010]-[0013]).
Claim 7, the enriching mixture is a mixture comprising a fatliquor, a polymer and/or a copolymer and/or a vegetable extract and/or an emulsifier ([0010]-[0013], [0046] and [0119]).
Claim 8, the fatliquor is selected from an aliphatic fatty compound and/or aromatic fatty compound, a lanolin-based fatliquor, a lecithin-based fatliquor, a natural sulphited oil, a synthetic sulphited oil, a natural sulphated oil, a synthetic sulphated oil, a vegetal oil, or mixtures thereof ([0010]-[0013], [0046] and [0119]).
Claim 9, the mixture further comprises a natural or synthetic dyestuff ([0056] and [0061]).
Claim 10, the acid is a weak acid (e.g. acetic/citric/formic/lactic acid) ([0012] and [0019]).
Claim 11, the process further comprises impregnating and/or coating the resulting mycelium with a mixture comprising a polymer and/or a copolymer and/or a resin and/or a resin cross-linker and/or a natural vegetable extract, and/or synthetic tanning agent, and optionally a wax and/or a pigment and/or a natural or synthetic dyestuff and/or silicon ([0008], [0010], [0012], [0046], [0059] and [0230]).
Claim 15, Kaplan-Bie does not appear to specifically mention the solvent being an ether and/or glycol solvent but Kaplan-Bie discloses that the solvent is to be an organic solvent and specifically mentions alcohol solvents [0046]. The examiner takes official notice that ether and/or glycol solvents are known organic alcohol solvents. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select an organic alcohol solvent such as an ether and/or glycol solvent, because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability and desired characteristics.
Claim 16, the alkali is selected from the group consisting of sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide, calcium hydroxide, and mixtures thereof [0008].
Claim 17, the acid is selected from the group consisting of alpha hydroxy acids, tricarboxylic acids, dicarboxylic acids, monocarboxylic acids, and mixtures thereof (e.g. citric/acetic/formic/lactic acid) ([0012] and [0019]).
Claim 18, the acid is selected from the group consisting of hydroxyacetic acid, 2-hydroxypropanoic acid, 2-hydroxy-1,4-butanedioic acid, dihydroxybutanedioic acid, and mixtures thereof, 2-hydroxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, 1-hydroxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, prop-1-ene-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, propane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, 2-hydroxynonadecane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, benzene-1,3,5-tricarboxylic acid, and mixtures thereof, ethanedioic acid, propanedioic acid, butanedioic acid, pentanedioic acid, hexanedioic acid, heptanedioic acid, octanedioic acid, nonanedioic acid, decanedioic acid, undecanedioic acid, dodecanedioic acid, tridecanedioic acid, tetradecanedioic acid, pentadecanedioic acid, hexadecanedioic acid, and mixtures thereof, methanoic acid, ethanoic acid, propanoic acid, butanoic acid, pentanoic acid, hexanoic acid, heptanoic acid, octanoic acid, nonanoic acid, decanoic acid, undecanoic acid, dodecanoic acid, tridecanoic acid, tetradecanoic acid, pentadecanoic acid, hexadecanoic acid, heptadecanoic acid, octodecanoic acid, nonadecanoic acid, eicosanoic acid, docosanoic acid, benzoic acid, 2-hydroxybenzoic acid, 2-mercaptopropanoic acid, and mixtures thereof (e.g. citric/acetic/formic/lactic acid) ([0012] and [0019]).
Claim 19, the acid is selected from the group consisting of 2-hydroxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, 2-hydroxypropanoic acid, methanoic acid, and mixtures thereof (e.g. citric/acetic/formic/lactic acid) ([0012] and [0019]).
Claim 20, the natural vegetable extract is a pyrogallol-based natural vegetable extract, catechol-based natural vegetable extract, or a mixture thereof, and/or wherein the synthetic tanning agent is an aromatic synthetic tanning agent, aliphatic synthetic tanning agent, or a mixture thereof [0012].
Claims 1-11 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPAP 2018/0282529 to Kaplan-Bie in view of USPAP 2021/0010198 to Stewart.
Claim 1, Kaplan-Bie discloses a process for producing leather, skin, hide and/or textile substitute from mycelium comprising the following steps: soaking mycelium in an organic solvent and reacting the mycelium with an aqueous solution comprising an inherently antimicrobial (biocide) tannic acid (see entire document including [0009], [0016]-[0019], [0082], [0088], [0090] and [0133]).
Kaplan-Bie does not appear to mention reacting the mycelium with an aqueous solution comprising a surfactant and with an alkali, but Stewart discloses a process for producing leather, skin, hide and/or textile substitute with retained strength, elasticity and thermal properties from mycelium comprising the steps of reacting mycelium with an aqueous solution comprising a surfactant and a biocide (e.g. tannins, tannic acid, and/or vegetable tannins) and with an alkali (e.g. calcium hydroxide) (see entire document including [0002], [0005], [0006], [0008], [0012], [0040] and [0046]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include the claimed steps, including those disclosed by Stewart, to provide a product with retained strength, elasticity and thermal properties.
Claim 2, the organic solvent is selected from the group consisting of an ether solvent, an alcohol solvent, an alcohol ether solvent, and mixtures thereof [0046].
Claim 3, the surfactant is a non-ionic (e.g. polysorbate) surfactant ([0040] of Stewart).
Claim 4, the biocide may be a phenolic biocide ([0016], [0017], [0082] and [0133] of Kaplan-Bie).
Claim 5, the alkali is selected from the group consisting of alkali metal hydroxide, alkaline earth metal hydroxide, and mixtures thereof ([0008] of Stewart).
Claim 6, said process further comprises a step of treating the mycelium with an enriching mixture and a step of treating the mycelium with an acid ([0010]-[0013] of Stewart).
Claim 7, the enriching mixture is a mixture comprising a fatliquor, a polymer and/or a copolymer and/or a vegetable extract and/or an emulsifier ([0010]-[0013], [0046] and [0119] of Stewart).
Claim 8, the fatliquor is selected from an aliphatic fatty compound and/or aromatic fatty compound, a lanolin-based fatliquor, a lecithin-based fatliquor, a natural sulphited oil, a synthetic sulphited oil, a natural sulphated oil, a synthetic sulphated oil, a vegetal oil, or mixtures thereof ([0010]-[0013], [0046] and [0119] of Stewart).
Claim 9, the mixture further comprises a natural or synthetic dyestuff ([0056] and [0061] of Stewart).
Claim 10, the acid is a weak acid (e.g. acetic/citric/formic/lactic acid) ([0012] and [0019] of Stewart).
Claim 11, the process further comprises impregnating and/or coating the resulting mycelium with a mixture comprising a polymer and/or a copolymer and/or a resin and/or a resin cross-linker and/or a natural vegetable extract, and/or synthetic tanning agent, and optionally a wax and/or a pigment and/or a natural or synthetic dyestuff and/or silicon ([0008], [0010], [0012], [0046], [0059] and [0230] of Stewart).
Claim 15, Kaplan-Bie does not appear to specifically mention the solvent being an ether and/or glycol solvent but Kaplan-Bie discloses that the solvent is to be an organic solvent and specifically mentions alcohol solvents [0046]. The examiner takes official notice that ether and/or glycol solvents are known organic alcohol solvents. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select an organic alcohol solvent such as an ether and/or glycol solvent, because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability and desired characteristics.
Claim 16, the alkali is selected from the group consisting of sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide, calcium hydroxide, and mixtures thereof ([0008] of Stewart).
Claim 17, the acid is selected from the group consisting of alpha hydroxy acids, tricarboxylic acids, dicarboxylic acids, monocarboxylic acids, and mixtures thereof (e.g. citric/acetic/formic/lactic acid) ([0012] and [0019] of Stewart).
Claim 18, the acid is selected from the group consisting of hydroxyacetic acid, 2-hydroxypropanoic acid, 2-hydroxy-1,4-butanedioic acid, dihydroxybutanedioic acid, and mixtures thereof, 2-hydroxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, 1-hydroxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, prop-1-ene-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, propane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, 2-hydroxynonadecane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, benzene-1,3,5-tricarboxylic acid, and mixtures thereof, ethanedioic acid, propanedioic acid, butanedioic acid, pentanedioic acid, hexanedioic acid, heptanedioic acid, octanedioic acid, nonanedioic acid, decanedioic acid, undecanedioic acid, dodecanedioic acid, tridecanedioic acid, tetradecanedioic acid, pentadecanedioic acid, hexadecanedioic acid, and mixtures thereof, methanoic acid, ethanoic acid, propanoic acid, butanoic acid, pentanoic acid, hexanoic acid, heptanoic acid, octanoic acid, nonanoic acid, decanoic acid, undecanoic acid, dodecanoic acid, tridecanoic acid, tetradecanoic acid, pentadecanoic acid, hexadecanoic acid, heptadecanoic acid, octodecanoic acid, nonadecanoic acid, eicosanoic acid, docosanoic acid, benzoic acid, 2-hydroxybenzoic acid, 2-mercaptopropanoic acid, and mixtures thereof (e.g. citric/acetic/formic/lactic acid) ([0012] and [0019] of Stewart).
Claim 19, the acid is selected from the group consisting of 2-hydroxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid, 2-hydroxypropanoic acid, methanoic acid, and mixtures thereof (e.g. citric/acetic/formic/lactic acid) ([0012] and [0019] of Stewart).
Claim 20, the natural vegetable extract is a pyrogallol-based natural vegetable extract, catechol-based natural vegetable extract, or a mixture thereof, and/or wherein the synthetic tanning agent is an aromatic synthetic tanning agent, aliphatic synthetic tanning agent, or a mixture thereof ([0012] of Stewart).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW T PIZIALI whose telephone number is (571)272-1541. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7am-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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/ANDREW T PIZIALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights