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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 16, 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-9,11,12,14-18,20 and 25-32 are pending. Claim 1 and 6 have been amended. Claims 10,13,19 and 21-24 have been cancelled. Claims 2,3,11,16,18 and 26-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions.
Claims 1,4-9,12,14,15,17,20,25 and 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Everaert (WO 2017/011237) in view of Nguyen (WO 2013/156385), Seiler (US 2019/0185785) and Fuchs (US 2016/0369209) for the reasons set forth below.
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 1,4-9,12,14,15,17,20,25,31 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Everaert (WO 2017/011237) in view of Nguyen (WO 2013/156385), Seiler (US 2019/0185785) and Fuchs (US 2016/0369209).
Everaert teaches treating keratinous fibers with compounds of formula (I) and (II) (paragraph 0021) wherein the pH is adjusted to about 2 to about 6 using a buffer (paragraph 0045) wherein the buffer is an acid or salt (paragraph 0045) wherein the acid is organic (paragraph 0047) such as lactic acid (paragraph 0049) or an inorganic acid such as hydrogen chloride (paragraph 0046). Everaert further teaches the composition comprises a reaction product of at least one lactone and at least one amino alcohol (paragraph 0025) at a molar ratio of 5:1 to 1:5 (paragraph 0044) wherein the lactone is that of formula (X) (paragraph 0039) and wherein the amino alcohol has 1-14 carbon atoms such as ethanolamine (paragraph 0026-0034). Everaert teaches the lactone can be selected from meadowfoam, delta-lactone, delta-octalactone, delta-decalactone, delta-nonalactone, massoia lactone, jasmine lactone (paragraph 0041). Everaert teaches the composition further can comprise surfactants such as nonionic surfactants at concentrations of up to 5% (paragraph 0057) to impart cleaning properties, rheology modifiers which are viscosity control agents at 0.1-1.5% (claim 24), thickening agents, colorants, fragrances (fabric finishing agent), emulsifiers, chelating agents, anti-static agents, deodorants, bleaches and oxidizing agents (stain removal) and soaps (paragraph 0051-0052, claim 19)
Everaert does not teach treating non-keratinous substrates.
Nguyen teaches that similar lactones (paragraphs 0045-0046) and amino alcohol (paragraph 0082) and reaction products thereof (paragraph 000270, ex 5-9 in table) are used to treat keratinous and non-keratinous substrates (paragraph 0029), particularly fabrics (paragraph 0232). Nguyen teaches the composition may be sprays (paragraph 0231) and therefore would be sprayed on fabrics. Nguyen further teaches the compositions can be applied to hair by spraying or dipping (paragraph 00243).
Seiler teaches that hair and clothes washing agents conventionally contain alkyl-d-gluconamides (paragraph 0026) for use in manual or machine (paragraph 0017) textile washing and cleansing (paragraph 0017, claim 8). Seiler teaches using dye transfer inhibitors in the textile washing compositions indicating dyed textiles are treated (claim 7). Seiler teaches the treatments provide improved cleaning performance and impart other desirable properties to the treated textiles (paragraph 0017).
Fuchs teaches that alkyl gluconamides substances are effective surfactants when used in detergents on polyester fabrics in laundering (paragraph 0297,0302-0304,0485,0487). Fuchs teaches the detergents comprise enzymes, UV absorbers, optical brighteners, greying inhibitors, crease inhibitors, ironing aids, antimicrobials (fabric finishers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the compositions of Everaert in treatment of non-keratinous substrates such as fabrics as Nguyen teaches similar lactone and amino alcohol reaction product compositions can be provided on both non-keratinous substrates such as dyed fabrics and keratinous substrates such as hair by spray application and Seiler teaches d-gluconamides are conventionally added to textile washing agents and the compositions provide the treated textiles with improved cleaning performance and impart other desirable properties to the textiles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the methods of Everaert by washing polyester fabrics as Fuchs teaches polyester fabrics are effectively cleaned in laundering processed with alkyl gluconamides with the benefit of surfactant properties. Fuchs further teaches polyesters are routinely laundered fabrics and since Seiler teaches similar compositions are used in clothes washing, using the compositions in a laundering cycle on polyester fabrics which are one of the most common washed fabrics is obvious. The same compositions provided to the same polyester fabrics would obviously provide the same improvement in tensile strength as this is a function of the interaction between the composition components and the polyester even if not explicitly recited in the prior art. Adding cleaning performance enhancers and fabric finishing agents taught by Fuchs including enzymes, UV absorbers, optical brighteners, greying inhibitors, crease inhibitors, ironing aids, antimicrobials to the detergents would be obvious for better cleaning performance and enhanced fabric appearance and properties.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed regarding the Everaert, Nguyen, Seilar and Fuchs rejection have been considered but are not persuasive. The examiner argues that Nguyen teaches that similar lactones (paragraphs 0045-0046) and amino alcohol (paragraph 0082) and reaction products thereof (paragraph 000270, ex 5-9 in table) are used to treat keratinous and non-keratinous substrates (paragraph 0029), particularly fabrics (paragraph 0232). Seiler teaches that hair and clothes washing agents conventionally contain alkyl-d-gluconamides (paragraph 0026) for use in manual or machine (paragraph 0017) textile washing and cleansing (paragraph 0017, claim 8). Seiler teaches using dye transfer inhibitors in the textile washing compositions indicating dyed textiles are treated (claim 7). Seiler teaches the treatments provide improved cleaning performance and impart other desirable properties to the treated textiles (paragraph 0017). Since it is recognized that applicant’s ingredients of the alkyl gluconamides of formula (I) and the reaction product of a lactone and an amino alcohol can both be used in compositions to treat hair or to treat textiles for the benefit of cleaning, preventing dye transfer and improving the properties of the textiles treated, it is not unobvious to use the compositions of Everaert on non-keratinous substrates such as polyester fabrics to impart these benefits. Nguyen, Seilar and Fuchs in combination teach the components of the hair treatment compositions of Everaert are all known to be used in fabric treatment as well as hair care. Using the hair care compositions of Everaert on non-keratin polyester fabric compositions would be obvious as these alkyl gluconamides, lactone/amino alcohol reaction products and adjunct materials are all effective for providing benefits to hair and to textiles such as polyester fabrics in cleansing and laundering processes. Using the same application methods taught by Everaert including spraying or dipping or spraying as taught by Nguyen is obvious as these methods are taught to be effective in applying the compositions to hair and to fabrics.
It is the examiners central position that the same components present in Everaert are known to be applied also effectively to fabrics during routine fabric care such as laundering and are known to be applied by spraying. Using known components effective in laundering applied in the same manner of spraying or dipping to routinely laundered fabrics would be obvious as treating hair and textiles is taught as functionally equivalent in Nguyen and Seilar. Using a known composition effective to treat hair in a method to treat a functionally equivalent substrate such as polyester fabric is obvious as similar components are used in the laundering and hair care art to treat either hair or fabrics. Applying the same composition to the same polyester substrate would impart the same properties of improved tensile strength even if not explicitly recited by the prior art.
Applicant has not demonstrated unexpected results in a manner commensurate in scope with the claims as the data in the specification tables only show improved tear strength for application of 1% and 5% products of example 4 which contains the reaction product of 3-amino-1-propanol and L-gluconic acid delta-lactone and not the thousands of compounds claimed in claim 1 which have no restriction on the composition component concentrations. Accordingly the rejections are maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMINA S KHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5573. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5:30pm EST.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached on 571-272-2817. 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.
/AMINA S KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761