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 .
This communication is responsive to claim set filed on 12/08/2025. Claims 8-21 are currently pending. Elected claimed 8-19 are under consideration is this Office Action.
Non-elected Claims 20-21 are WITHDRAWN.
The 35 USC rejections based on Akinari et al. (JP2011001419) dated 09/10/2025 are WITHDRAWN due to Applicant’s amendment.
Claims 8-19 are rejected for the reasons below.
The text of the 35 U.S. Code can be found in a previous Office Action.
Continued Examination
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/08/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheunemann et al. (US20170151164 A1).
Regarding claims 8, 16-19, Scheunemann teaches a hair treatment agent comprising at least one amino-functional silicone, at least one nonionic surfactant, at least one organic acid (claim 1) and water ([0235]); wherein the exemplary amino-functional silicones include:
PNG
media_image1.png
102
495
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein n=0 to 1999 and m=1 to 2000 ([0171]), the amount of the repeating units of -O-Si(CH3)2 overlapping the claimed m value and the amount of the repeating units of -O-Si(CH3)A overlapping the claimed n value; and wherein the amino-functional silicones have an amine value above 0.25 mEq/g, i. e., below 4, 000 g/mol ([0174]), overlapping the claimed 1,000 to 20,000 g/mol. Scheunemann further teaches the preferred organic acid is lactic acid ([0362]). Scheunemann furthermore teaches the hair agent contains about 0.01 to about 20 wt.% amino-functional silicones ([0176]), about 0.3 to about 10 wt.% nonionic surfactant ([0128]), about 0.001 to about 10 wt. % organic acid ([0230]). Thus, the mass% of nonionic surfactant relative to amino-functional silicones is 1.5% to 100,000% (0.3/20*100 to 10/0.01*100), overlapping the claimed 5 to 100%. The mol% of lactic acid relative to a number of moles of amino groups of the amino-functional silicones is 0.22 to 4440497% ((0.001/90.08)/(20/4000) *100 to (10/90.08)/(0.01/4000)*100), overlapping the claimed 50 to 100 mol%. Moreover, Scheunemann exemplifiers the water/ amino-functional silicones of hair shampoo series 1 Ex 1 being 9350 mass% and the hair shampoo series 1 Ex 2 being 9100 mass%, overlapping the claimed 85 to 10,000 mass%.
Although Scheunemann is silent on the concentrations of the claimed cyclic low-molecular-weight siloxanes, based on above analysis, Scheunemann teaches a substantially identical silicone emulsion, as such the claimed concentrations of the cyclic low-molecular-weight siloxanes before or after storage are expected. "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present (See MPEP 2112.01 II). In this case, Scheunemann does not disclose that the amino-modified silicone was made from the cyclic low -molecular - weight siloxanes, therefore, one skilled artisan would reasonably infer that the fresh-made hair treatment agent does not contain any of the cyclic low -molecular -weight siloxanes. Scheunemann further teaches the amount of amino-functional silicones can be increased still further if specific nonionic components are also used in the hair treatment agent because the nonionic components have positive effects on the storage stability of the hair treatment agent. The disclosure indicates that the amino-functional silicones have storage stability in the hair treatment agent discussed above.
Regarding Claim 9, Scheunemann teaches the hair treatment agent contains cosmetic carriers which are water and alcohol ([0234-0237]), wherein the alcohol can be at least one of polyhydric alcohols, such as 1,2-propylene glycol, diglycerol, 1,2-butanediol, polyethylene glycols, etc. ([0237]). Scheunemann further teaches alcohols being about 0.01 to about 40% by weight of the carrier ([0236]), therefore, the balance of water of hair shampoo series 1 Ex 1 is exchangeable with water and at least one of polyhydric alcohols wherein the polyhydric alcohols are 0.01 to about 40 wt. % of the total weight of water and polyhydric alcohols, consequently, the mass% of polyhydric alcohols / amino-functional silicones of the modified hair shampoo series 1 Ex 1 is from 0.935% to 3,740%, overlapping the claimed 1 to 20 mass%.
Regarding Claims 10-11, Scheunemann teaches the hair treatment agent contains 0.5 to 20 wt.% anionic surfactant ([0064]) and about 0.01 to about 20 wt.% amino-functional silicones ([0176]); thus, the mass% of an anionic surfactant relative to the mass of amino-functional silicones being 2.5 mass% to 200.000 mass%, overlapping the claimed 0.1 to 3 mass%.
Regarding Claims 12-15, Scheunemann teaches suitable nonionic surfactants are C8-C30 fatty acid mono- and diesters of adducts of ethylene oxide to glycerol, for example PEG-7 Glyceryl Cocoate, and/or adducts of propylene oxide to linear fatty alcohols having 8 to 22 C atoms ([0126]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 8-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUIHONG QIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-8315. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 571-272-1130. 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.
/HUIHONG QIAO/Examiner, Art Unit 1763
/CATHERINE S BRANCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763