DETAILED ACTION
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) 11-16, 18-20, 23-30, 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubo (US 6379035) and Zeng (DE 10126267).
Claim 11, Kubo discloses a discharge opening (FIG 1), wherein the mixing device comprises at least two mixer plates (3, 4; FIG 1, 22-25) which each comprise one or more passages (14) whose diameters narrow in a direction of the discharge opening (14a, 14c), the mixer plates being arranged one after the other in the direction of the discharge opening (FIG 1).
But is silent on mixer plates spaced apart.
Zeng teaches mixer plates spaced apart (Paragraph 12; FIG 11).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kubo with mixer plates as taught by Zeng in order to adjust the amount of resistance and thereby mixing that occurs.
Claim 12, Kubo discloses wherein four mixer plates (3, 4; FIG 1) are arranged one after the other in the direction of the discharge opening.
Claims 13-14, Kubo substantially discloses the apparatus as claimed above but is silent on wherein a spacing between the mixer plates is from 0.1 mm to 1 mm, or 0.3 mm to 0.6 mm.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adjust the spacing as evidenced by Zeng (paragraph 12; FIG 11) for the intended application, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. By adjusting the spacing between the mixing plates the resistance and the amount of mixing that occurs can be adjusted thereby optimizing it for the properties of the fluid to be dispensed. A particular parameter can be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05.II.B.). It has been held that the discovery of the optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill in the art.
Claims 15-16, Kubo substantially discloses the apparatus as claimed above but is silent on wherein the thickness of the mixer plates is from 0.4 mm to 0.6 mm, or 0.05 mm to 1.5 mm.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adjust the thickness for the intended application, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. By adjusting the thickness of the mixing plates the resistance and the amount of mixing that occurs can be adjusted thereby optimizing it for the properties of the fluid to be dispensed. A particular parameter can be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05.II.B.). It has been held that the discovery of the optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill in the art.
Claim 18, Kubo discloses wherein the passages have a diameter of from 0.1 mm to 10 mm (Col 10, lines 13-21) at a flow exit.
Claims 19-20, Kubo substantially discloses the apparatus as claimed above but is silent on wherein the passages have a diameter of from 0.2 mm to 1 mm, 0.3 mm to 0.6 mm at a flow exit.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adjust the diameter of a passages at a flow exit for the intended application, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. By adjusting the diameter of the flow passages, the resistance and the amount of mixing that occurs can be adjusted thereby optimizing it for the properties of the fluid to be dispensed. A particular parameter can be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05.II.B.). It has been held that the discovery of the optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill in the art.
Claim 23, Kubo discloses wherein all diameters of the passages at a flow exit of a mixer plate are the same (14b; FIG 1, 22-25).
Claim 24, Kubo substantially discloses the apparatus as claimed above but is silent on wherein diameters of the passages of the mixer plates decrease toward an outlet.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, to decrease the diameter of the passages toward the direction of the outlet, for the intended application, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. By adjusting the diameter of the flow passages, the resistance and the amount of mixing that occurs can be adjusted thereby optimizing it for the properties of the fluid to be dispensed. A particular parameter can be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05.II.B.). It has been held that the discovery of the optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill in the art.
Claim 25, Kubo discloses one or more preparations, at least one of the one or more preparations comprising at least two phases (abstract; Col 1, lines 4-8; Col 11, line 57 to Col 12, line 17).
Claims 26 and 28, Kubo wherein the at least one preparation comprising at least two phases is a cosmetic preparation (abstract; Col 1, lines 4-8; Col 11, line 57 to Col 12, line 17; KUBO discloses being used in chemical manufacturing of which a cosmetic preparation would be a chemical compound).
Claim 27, Kubo discloses wherein the method comprises mixing the one or more preparations with the mixing device of claim 11 (rejection above of claim 11).
Claim 29 and 30, Kubo discloses wherein the at least one preparation having at least two phases comprises particulate material (Col 11, line 57 to Col 12, line 17).
Claim 32, Kubo discloses a discharge opening (FIG 1), wherein the mixing device comprises four mixer plates (3, 4; FIG 1, 22-25) which each comprise one or more passages (14) whose diameters narrow in a direction of the discharge opening (14a, 14c), the mixer plates being arranged one after the other in the direction of the discharge opening (FIG 1), and the passages have a diameter of from 0.1 mm to 1 mm at a flow exit (Col 10, lines 13-21).
But is silent on mixer plates spaced apart, wherein a spacing between the mixer plates is from 0.1 mm to 1 mm, a thickness of the mixer plates is from 0.05 mm to 1.5 mm.
Zeng teaches mixer plates spaced apart (Paragraph 12; FIG 11).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kubo with mixer plates as taught by Zeng in order to adjust the amount of resistance and thereby mixing that occurs.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adjust the spacing as evidenced by Zeng (paragraph 12; FIG 11) for the intended application, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. By adjusting the spacing between the mixing plates the resistance and the amount of mixing that occurs can be adjusted thereby optimizing it for the properties of the fluid to be dispensed. A particular parameter can be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05.II.B.). It has been held that the discovery of the optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill in the art.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adjust the thickness for the intended application, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. By adjusting the thickness of the mixing plates the resistance and the amount of mixing that occurs can be adjusted thereby optimizing it for the properties of the fluid to be dispensed. A particular parameter can be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05.II.B.). It has been held that the discovery of the optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill in the art.
Claim 33, Kubo discloses at least one of the at least two preparations comprising at least two phases (abstract; Col 1, lines 4-8; Col 11, line 57 to Col 12, line 17; KUBO discloses being used in chemical manufacturing of which a cosmetic preparation is a chemical compound).
Claim(s) 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubo as applied to claim 25 above and in further view of Muller (US 20200164323 A1).
Claim 31, Kubo substantially discloses the apparatus as claimed above but is silent on wherein the dispenser comprises two chambers in each of which a preparation is present.
Muller teaches wherein the dispenser comprises two chambers (4) in each of which a preparation (5, 6) is present.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kubo with chambers as taught by Muller in order to provide storage for materials to be mixed and dispensed.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments regarding newly amended claims are addressed in the new grounds of rejection above.
Regarding applicant’s argument, on page 9, the applicant states that “…it is pointed out that Fig.1 of KUBO clearly shows 19 mixer plates, considerably more than 4 mixer plates.” This argument is not persuasive as the transitional phrase used is “comprising” see MPEP 2111.03.
Regarding applicant’s argument, on page 10, that a cosmetic preparation is not inherently taught. See claims 26 and 28 of the new grounds of rejection above.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY W CARROLL whose telephone number is (571)272-4988. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 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, Paul Durand can be reached on (571) 272-4459. 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.
JEREMY W. CARROLL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3754
/Jeremy Carroll/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754