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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 22 and December 23, 2025 have been entered.
In the claim amendments filed December 23, 2025, claims 1-5, 7-10, 12-15, and 17-19 were amended, claim 11 was cancelled, and claims 20 and 21 were added. Claims 1-5, 7-10, 12-15, and 17-21 are treated on the merits in this action. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1-5, 7-10, 12-15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oelrich (US 2019/0105240) in view of Doering (US 2019/0060184).
Oelrich teaches “a cosmetic preparation in the form of an O/W emulsion with improved skin compatibility, comprising short-chain alkane -1,2-dioles, emulsifiers, fatty alcohols, oils, waxes, carboxylic acids, antiperspirant agent and water, the preparation being characterized in that it is solid and dimensionally stable” and thus can be rolled onto skin (abstract; see title; paras.0015, 0026, 0039, 0042; claims 29-48). Oelrich’s O/W emulsions comprise:
one or more waxes which melt from a temperature of 40° C. at 1013 hPa without decomposition, at 8% -15% by weight (paras.0073-80, 0083-85, );
preferably at least 32% by weight water (paras.0118-19); and
at least one nonionic emulsifier having an HLB value up to a maximum of 8 (para.0039, 0042, 0046, 0050-52).
Example 7 is free of aluminum, zirconium, and/or zinc-based antiperspirant actives, and comprises cetyl palmitate, hydrogenated castor oil and fatty acids and ester which total to 15.5%, steareth-2 at 0.5%, perfume, and water ad 100. Cetyl palmitate has a melting point of 43- 48°. Oelrich teaches other hydrogenated oils (para.0076), preservatives (para.0130) and various perfumes including those which have antimicrobial activity such as linalool (para.0129).
Oelrich discusses prior art liquid antiperspirant compositions wherein “advantage of the high water content of the antiperspirant compositions is that a fresh, cooling sensation is perceived when applying the composition to the skin” (para.0009).
Oelrich does not specifically teach a liquid formulation in claim 1 or the droplet size of the oil-in-water emulsion in claim 2.
Doering is drawn “antiperspirant and/or deodorizing cosmetic agents in the form of oil-in-water emulsions, which contain a combination of isopropylisostearate and isopropylmyristate as cosmetic oils and a small total quantity of oils and emulsifiers” (abstract). Like Oelrich, Doering’s compositions are also O/W emulsions with water or an aqueous carrier comprising up to about 90 wt.% (para.0051, Table at pages 9-12), and comprise nonionic emulsifier and fatty acids (see, e.g., claim 1). Doering teaches roll-on application (para.0107). Doering teaches that for “transparent emulsions, the droplets distributed in the dispersed phase should have as small a mean particle diameter as possible, generally significantly below about 1000 nm, preferably below about 400 nm or even below about 200 nm” (para.0009). This range is within that in claim 2.
It would have been prima facie obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Oelrich and Doering and prepare Oelrich ‘s antiperspirant as a liquid product or comprise the droplet size within the range in claim 2. The skilled person would have been suggested to do so because both are drawn to cosmetic O/W emulsions for topical application comprising nonionic emulsifiers, and Doering teaches (i) such compositions can be formed in liquid products for roll-on application, and (ii) that droplet size below 1000 nm produces transparent emulsions, and teaches suitable alternative product forms and ingredients. The skilled person would moreover understand that while Oelrich teaches consumer’s preference for the solid form for direct application from packaging, Doering teaches roll-on application which is also convenient and simultaneously offers the “fresh, cooling sensation” of a liquid composition that Oelrich discusses.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 7-10, 12-15, and 17-19 have been considered but are moot in light of the rejection as modified above which addresses the claim amendments.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20 and 21 are allowable.
CONCLUSION
Claims 1-5, 7-10, 12-15, and 17-19 are not allowable.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to H. S. PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-5258. The examiner can normally be reached on weekdays.
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, Ali Soroush can be reached at (571)272-9925. 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.
/H. SARAH PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1614