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
Claims 45-53 and 63-64 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on April 7, 2026. Without acquiescing with the arguments provided, once the elected claims are considered to be in condition for allowance, rejoinder will be considered where possible.
Claims 54-55 and 58-62 are currently pending.
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.
Claim 60 is 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. Claims 61 and 62 depend on the rejected claim and, therefore, are also rejected.
Claim 60 recites the limitation "the additives" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 55-55 and 58-59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nel (WO 2023/148578) .
The applied reference has a common Inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
With regards to claim 54, Nel teaches a board comprising cellulose-containing materials and a glue to connect the materials to each other (abstract) that is based on hyperbranched polyamides (page 3) that is obtained by polycondensation of amino acids of arginine, glutamine, asparagine, and lysine (pages 5-6). Nel further teaches the use of carbohydrates (page 6).
With regards to claim 55, Nel teaches the amount of hyperbranched polyamide formed as stated above to be 80 to 90% of the polyamide (page 9).
With regards to claim 58, Nel teaches the composition to include crosslinkers (page 9). Nel teaches the crosslinkers to include polyketones, polyesters, isocyanate dispersions, epoxides, glyoxal and other dialdehydes (pages 9 and 21).
With regards to claims 60 and 61, Nel teaches the addition of a potassium salt (page 20).
Claims 54-55 and 58-59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al (Composites, Part B, 227, 2021, 109403).
With regards to claim 54, Xu teaches a high bonding performance composition (title) for the wood based panel industry (abstract) (reading on cellulose based materials) that contains carboxymethyl chitosan (abstract) (reading on a carbohydrate) and polyamide-epichlorohydrin (page 1) (reading on a linear polyamide).
With regards to claim 55, Xu teaches the polyamide to be the only polyamide in the glue composition (pages 2-3).
With regards to claim 58, Xu teaches the composition to include a crosslinker (abstract) that includes 2,3-butanedione (abstract).
With regards to claim 59, Xu teaches the amount of the amine to be 2 grams in a total concentration of 17 grams (table 1) reading on a ratio of 0.1.
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.
Claims 59 and 62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nel (WO 2023/148578).
The disclosure of Nel is adequately set forth in paragraph 8 above and is herein incorporated by reference.
With regards to claim 59, Nel does not teach the weight ratio of amines to the total amount of amines and carbohydrates.
However, generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. See MPEP 2144.05. Further, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 124 (CCPA 1955). In this case, one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention would know to alter the amount of the reactants in order to control the rate and amount of reaction that occurs between the two.
With regards to claim 62, Nel does not teach the amount of the potassium compound.
However, generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. See MPEP 2144.05. Further, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 124 (CCPA 1955). In this case, one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention would know to alter the amount of base in order to achieve the desired pH of the composition.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA WHITELEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5203. The examiner can normally be reached 8 - 5:00.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 5712721130. 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.
/JESSICA WHITELEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights