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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9 and 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dexter et al. (US Patent No. 6500447), in view of (a) Ouali et al. (US Patent No. 9034384), (b) Vautrin et al (US 2013/0089591), and (c) Marquisee (US 3,954,678).
Regarding claims 1; Dexter et al. teaches a process for preparing microcapsules prepared by providing an aqueous solution containing an emulsifier (stabilizer), dispersing, with agitation, in the aqueous solution, a water- immiscible solution (i.e. oil) comprising a water immiscible amino resin prepolymer, polyacid halide, and a water miscible active ingredient (hydrophobic material) to form an emulsion, and heating (curing step) the emulsion to form microcapsules [col6, line14-28; Ex1].
Dexter fails to teach that the oil phase may include a stabilizer. However, Marquisee teaches method of making microcapsules utilizing a two phase system (abstract). Marquisee teaches that a surfactant or emulsifying agent may be present in either the aqueous or organic phase (col 4, lines 37+). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a stabilizer such as a surfactant or emulsifying agent in the oil phase taught in Dexter. The motivation for doing so would have been Marquisee teaches such stabilizers are useful in two-phase microcapsule processes an may be included in either the oil or aqueous phase.
Dexter fails to teach the process for preparing the microcapsule comprising the claimed amino compound A. Ouali et al. teaches core-shell microcapsules in which a first amine, such as L-lysine is added to an aqueous phase that is then dispersed with an oil phase to form an emulsion [0004, 0008-0027, 0049-0056]. The examiner notes L-lysine reads on the claimed “amino acid” limitation of amended claim 1. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to add an amine compound as taught by Ouali et al., in the aqueous phase of the process of forming the microcapsules, as disclosed by Dexter et al., and would have been motivated to do so in order to achieve a resultant core-shell microcapsule that is negatively charged over a wide range of pH, ranging from acidic to basic pH and also have improve deposition on substrates.
Dexter also fails to teach the addition of amino compound B after the oil phase has been dispersed into a water phase optionally comprising amino compound A. However, Vautrin teaches a polyamide microcapsule in which an aqueous solution comprising an amino compound (herein understood to read on amino compound B) is added to a dispersion of oil in a water phase (0036-0037). Said process allows for the amine to react with the acyl halide to affect a polyaddition reaction. The amino compound may comprise ethylene diamine, guadine, diaminocyclohexane, and the like (0042). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to add the amino compound of Vautrin to the composition of Dexter after the oil phase has been dispersed in the aqueous phase. The motivation for doing so would have been to initiate the addition reaction.
With regards to claim 3, Dexter teaches polyacid halides suitable for the present invention include trimesoyl chloride (i.e. 1,3,5-benzene tricarbonyl chloride) and suitable polyamines include ethylene diamine [col8, line33-56].
With regards to claim 6, Ouali teaches the use of L-lysine in the aqueous phase.
With regards to claim 7, Ouali teaches the use of L-lysine in the aqueous phase and adding a second amine compound after the emulsion is formed provide a core-shell microcapsule that is negatively charged over a wide range of pH, ranging from acidic to basic pH and has improved deposition on substrates [0034-0035; 0058].
With regards to claim 8, the references are understood to read on the claimed invention when amino-compound A is Lysine, and amino compound B is the compound disclosed in Vautrin.
Regarding claim 9; Dexter et al. teaches polyvinyl alcohol is a suitable emulsifier (biopolymer) [col5, line39-55].
Regarding claim 11; Dexter et al. teaches the ratio of acid halide groups (e.g. COCl) to amino groups (e.g. NH2) in the shell wall forming materials is about 2:1 to 3:1 [col2, line50-55; col6, line53-60]
Regarding claim 12; Dexter et al. teaches, in the preferred embodiments, employing 22.22 wt% of the water-immiscible active ingredient (pendimethalin; hydrophobic material) and 1.59 wt% trimesoyl chloride (acyl chloride), thus the weight ratio of the acyl chloride to hydrophobic material is about 0.07 (as calculated by Examiner).
With regard to claim 13, a polyamide core-shell microcapsule slurry is obtained by the process of Dexter in view of Ouali for the reasons noted above.
With regard to claim 14, Dexter does not teach the hydrophobic material may be a perfume. However, Vautrin teaches it I known to encapsulate odorant formulations in microcapsules to alter the rate of evaporation or stabilize the perfume (see 001-0004). Said perfume may further comprise a perfumery base or addition co-ingredient (0060+)> Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a perfume and additional perfumery base or co-ingredient in the microcapsule rendered obvious by Dexter. The motivation for doing so would have been such compositions are known to be useful for encapsulation in order to stabilize the perfume and control its volatility.
With regards to claims 15 and 16, Vautrin teaches the microcapsule may be used in consumer products such a fabric care products (0070)
Claim(s) 10 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dexter et al. (US Patent No. 6,500,447), in view of Ouali et al. (US Patent No. 9034384), Vautrin (US 20213/0089591), and Marquisee (US 3,954,678), as applied to claims above, and further in view of Ouali et al. (WO 2015/197757).
Dexter in view of Ouali, Marquisee, and Vautrin is relied upon as above. Specifically, Dexter teaches suitable emulsifiers (i.e. stabilizers) include polyvinyl alcohol, however fails to teach the stabilizer is selected from the group consisting of whey protein, casein, sodium caseinate, bovine serum albumin, and mixtures thereof. Wo’757 teaches a process for producing core shell microcapsules, suitable for use in encapsulating herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides , wherein an aqueous phase is prepared by dissolving an emulsifier or colloidal stabilizer, such as polyvinyl alcohol or casein [p8, line22-31]. Casein stabilizers are known in the art to be colloidal stabilizers. Therefore, WO’757 teaches that polyvinyl alcohol and casein are functional equivalents for the purpose of functioning as an emulsifier in the process for making core-shell microcapsules, for use in encapsulating active ingredients such as fungicides, herbicides, and insecticides. It is prima facie obvious to substitute art-recognized functional equivalents known for the same purpose (See MPEP § 2144.06).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 6/23/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 103
With regards to the rejection of claims 1-4, 6-9 and 11-18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being allegedly
unpatentable over Dexter (US 6500447), in view of Ouali (US 9034384) and Vautrin (US
2013/0089591), applicant argues claim 1 recites, among other things, "a) Dissolving at least one acyl chloride and at least one stabilizer in a hydrophobic material to form an oil phase," (emphasis added). Thus, the claims require that the stabilizer be present in the hydrophobic material as part of the oil phase before the oil phase is mixed with the water phase to form the oil-in-water emulsion. Said argument is noted and addressed by the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US2019/0125687 teaches the amine may be added to the aqueous phase used to make a polyamide microcapsule prior to blending the oil phase (0089).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN R KRUER whose telephone number is (571)272-1510. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Callie Shosho can be reached on (571) 272-1123. 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.
/KEVIN R KRUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights