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
This application was filed on and is a CON of PCT/CN2020/100100 filed 07/03/2020 which claims the benefit of the priority of China Patent Application No. 201910643777.2 filed 07/17/2019.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 3-6, 8, 10-13 are pending. Claim 6 is amended. Claims 2-5, 7, and 9 are canceled. Claims 1, 6, 8, and 10-13 are being examined on the merits in this office action.
Claim Rejections - Withdrawn
The rejection of claims 3-6 under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, is withdrawn because claims 3-5 are canceled and claim 6 is amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 - Maintained
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 6, 8, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unno et al. (CN1893841A – hereinafter “Unno” – cited and enclosed in the previous office action) in view of Qi et al. (CN109984229A (hereinafter - “Qi” - cited and enclosed in the previous office action), Ishihara et al. (JP2001000142A hereinafter – “Ishihara” - cited and enclosed in the previous office action), Muller (US20180289030A1 – hereinafter “Muller”- cited and enclosed in the previous office action) and Ji et al. (CN109090614A – hereinafter “Ji” - cited and enclosed in the previous office action).
The teachings of the CN1893841A, CN109984229A, JP2001000142A and CN109090614A publications are based on the English language translation of the publications obtained by Espacenet and the citations are based on the English language translation.
Unno teaches a composition that comprises water-soluble nucleoprotein 1500 mg to 40000 mg, collagen 30g to 140g or the composition comprises 1.5 to 40g of nucleoprotein (Abstract; claim 1). Unno teaches the composition turned the roots of the white hair black (Page 3 2nd paragraph), and decreased hair loss and gray hair; tightened skin and removed wrinkles or sagging (Page 5, 3rd paragraph). Unno teaches that the composition may comprises form of zinc contained in edible yeast (Page 8, 1st paragraph). Unno teaches that the nucleoprotein is from salmon (claim 3; Page 2, last paragraph; Page 5, 5th paragraph). Unno teaches that the nucleoprotein comprises DNA-based nucleic acid (Page 4, whole page).
Unno’s composition does not include yeast powder and coffee fruit extract and Unno does not teach chlorogenic and proanthocyanidin concentration and DNA-Na content of 86% or more.
Qi teaches a composition that comprises 10-40 parts of collagen protein powder, ground coffee 1-5 parts (claim 1). Qi teaches the composition has the effect of increasing skin hydration, increasing skin elasticity, skin regeneration and reducing wrinkles, thus delaying skin aging (Page 3, 1st paragraph).
With regards to yeast, Ishihara teaches a composition for hair restoration and hair growth comprising yeast and that the yeast can be about 35-40% (Page 2, 7th paragraph). Ishihara teaches that the composition was effective for hair growth and that it also suppresses skin inflammation and is effective for moisturizing skin, acute and chronic dermatitis, and wound healing process (Page 3, last paragraph).
Regarding chlorogenic acid and proanthocyanidin concentration, Muller teaches compositions that comprises coffee fruit extracts (Abstract; claims 48-50; [0002, 0006]), that the coffee fruit extract has a total phenolic acid concentration of at least about 5%, wherein the total phenolic acid concentration comprises chlorogenic acid and proanthocyanidin (claim 19-20, 23-25; [0010-0011], wherein total phenolic acid concentration comprises chlorogenic acid and is at least 20% [0016, 0039]. Muller teaches that coffee fruit extract comprises antioxidants such as proanthocyanidin at a minimum concentration of 5% [0016]. Muller teaches the composition is a dietary supplement, snack bar, neutraceutical, juice, sports drink, carbonated beverage, or tea (claim 51), wherein the composition is a skin care product, anti-aging product, or other cosmetic product (claim 52).
Regarding DNA-Na, Ji teaches a composition comprising salmon DNA-Na and that the mass content in is 97%-99% (Page 1, last 2 lines, page 3, line 2-3; Example 1). Ji teaches the composition for beauty, fatigue relief and immunity enhancement (claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Unno, Qi, Ishihara, Muller and Ji and prepare a composition that comprises nucleoprotein, coffee fruit extracts, yeast and collagen since the cited references teach that a composition comprising either one or a combination of the ingredients was successful for hair growth, delaying hair graying or for skin improvement Page 3, 1sta paragraph of Qi reference). It would have been obvious to have the coffee fruit extract concentrations of chlorogenic acid and proanthocyanidin as taught by Muller since teaches the composition is edible as a skin care product, anti-aging product, or other cosmetic product (claim 52). It would have been obvious to include DNA-Na from salmon as taught by Ji, since Ji teaches the composition for the same use as the instant invention for beauty, fatigue relief and immunity enhancement (claim 1) and Examiner notes that Unno similarly teaches that the nucleoprotein comprises DNA-based nucleic acid from salmon (Page 4, whole page).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in preparing such a composition since Unno teaches the composition comprising nucleotides turned the roots of the white hair black (Page 3 2nd paragraph), and decreased hair loss and gray hair; tightened skin and removed wrinkles or sagging (Page 5, 3rd paragraph), Qi teaches that a composition comprising coffee fruit and collagen has the effect of increasing skin hydration, increasing skin elasticity, skin regeneration and reducing wrinkles, thus delaying skin aging (Page 3, 1st paragraph) and Muller teaches chlorogenic acid and proanthocyanidin concentrations, and Ishihara teaches that a composition comprising yeast was effective for hair growth and hair growth (Page 3, last paragraph). One of ordinary skill in the art who has read the cited references would be motivated to combine all the ingredients of the cited compositions for promoting hair growth, delaying hair graying or for skin improvement. With regards to the concentrations of the ingredients, Examiner notes that the concentration of the active agent is a result effective variable and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable may be characterized by routine experimentation (See MPEP 2144 II). Further, as stated in MPEP “It is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose of promoting hair growth. [T]he idea of combining them flows logically from having been individually taught in the prior art." (see MPEP 2144.06 I). The references render obvious claims 1 and 6.
Regarding claims 3 and 5, Qi teaches 10-40 parts of collagen protein powder, ground coffee 1-5 parts (claim 1). Examiner notes that the total amount of ingredients in the composition of Qi totals to 160. Therefore the percent amount of coffee in the composition is about 3% and the amount of collagen is about 25%. Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to optimize the concentrations of active ingredients to arrive at the instant dosages since concentration of the active agent is a result effective variable and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable may be characterized by routine experimentation (See MPEP 2144 II).
Regarding claim 4, Ishihara teaches the yeast is about 35% (Page 2, 6th paragraph). Ishihara teaches in other embodiments where the yeast is about 10%. Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to optimize the concentrations of active ingredients to arrive at the instant dosages since concentration of the active agent is a result effective variable and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable may be characterized by routine experimentation (See MPEP 2144 II).
Regarding claims 8 and 10, Muller teaches compositions that comprises coffee fruit extracts (Abstract; claims 48-50; [0002, 0006]), that the coffee fruit extract has a total phenolic acid concentration of at least about 5%, wherein the total phenolic acid concentration comprises chlorogenic acid and proanthocyanidin (claim 19-20, 23-25; [0010-0011], wherein total phenolic acid concentration comprises chlorogenic acid and is at least 20% [0016, 0039]. Muller teaches that coffee fruit extract comprises antioxidants such as proanthocyanidin at a minimum concentration of 5% [0016]. Muller teaches the composition is a dietary supplement, snack bar, nutraceutical, juice, sports drink, carbonated beverage, or tea (claim 51), wherein the composition is a skin care product, anti-aging product, or other cosmetic product (claim 52). Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to optimize the concentrations of chlorogenic acids, proanthocyanidins, neochlorogenic acids to arrive at the instant dosages since concentration of the active agent is a result effective variable and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable may be characterized by routine experimentation (See MPEP 2144 II).
Regarding claims 11-13, the composition of Unno comprises nucleoprotein, yeast and collagen and Unno teaches the composition turned the roots of the white hair black (Page 3 2nd paragraph), and decreased hair loss and gray hair; tightened skin and removed wrinkles or sagging (Page 5, 3rd paragraph). Examiner notes that the teachings of Unno of tightening the skin read on skin improvement. Further, Qi teaches a composition that comprises 10-40 parts of collagen protein powder, ground coffee 1-5 parts (claim 1). Qi teaches the composition has the effect of increasing skin hydration, increasing skin elasticity, skin regeneration and reducing wrinkles, thus delaying skin aging (Page 3, 1st paragraph). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the ingredients of the cited references to arrive to the composition of the instant claims for use for promoting hair growth, delay hair graying and for skin improvement and would have achieved a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant arguments
Applicant argues that the combination of nucleoprotein peptide and whole coffee fruit extract has achieved a 41.0% ((44.91%-31.85%)/31.85%) better effect than nucleoprotein peptide alone, and 20.1% ((44.91%-37.39%)/37.39%) better effect than whole coffee fruit extract alone, both of which are statically significant (Page 5-6 of Arguments).
Applicant argues that none of Qi, Ishihara, Muller teaches nucleoprotein or nucleoprotein peptide (Page 6-8 of Arguments).
Examiner’s Response
Examiner notes that the use of nucleoprotein is known in the art. Specifically, Unno teaches a composition that comprises water-soluble nucleoprotein 1500 mg to 40000 mg, collagen 30g to 140g or the composition comprises 1.5 to 40g of nucleoprotein (Abstract; claim 1). Unno teaches the composition turned the roots of the white hair black (Page 3 2nd paragraph), and decreased hair loss and gray hair; tightened skin and removed wrinkles or sagging (Page 5, 3rd paragraph). Further, Unno teaches that the nucleoprotein is from salmon (claim 3; Page 2, last paragraph; Page 5, 5th paragraph). Unno teaches that the nucleoprotein comprises DNA-based nucleic acid (Page 4, whole page). Examiner notes that the teachings of Unno are similar to the teachings of Ji with regards to the DNA-Na from salmon. Ji teaches a composition comprising salmon DNA-Na and that the mass content in is 97%-99% (Page 1, last 2 lines, page 3, line 2-3; Example 1). Ji teaches the composition for beauty, fatigue relief and immunity enhancement (claim 1). Further, it is known in the art that DNA-Na is used in cosmetic composition for strengthening and restoring hair (See US5547684A – reference used to rebut Applicants’ arguments). Further, US20090036385A1 teaches hair regrowth compositions that comprises DNA nucleoprotein. Examiner notes Applicants assertion that the cited references do not teach nucleoprotein is unpersuasive.
Further, with regards to the argument of synergism, Examiner notes that while there appears to be synergism between coffee and nucleoprotein, it is not commensurate in scope with the claimed invention since it is not unclear how the other components in the composition affect the synergism. The arguments is thus unpersuasive.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mercy H. Sabila whose telephone number is (571)272-2562. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 5:00 am - 3:00 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, Lianko G. Garyu can be reached at (571)270-7367. 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.
/MERCY H SABILA/ Examiner, Art Unit 1654
/LIANKO G GARYU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1654