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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/15/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment and argument filed 09/25/2025 in response to the final rejection, are acknowledged and have been fully considered. Any previous rejection or objection not mentioned herein is withdrawn.
Claims 1-3 are pending and being examined on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jon J. Kabara (US6638978B1) and USDA National Organic Program, (Glycerol Monooleate, NOSB TAP Review Compiled by OMRI, September 25, 2001, page 1-16).
Regarding claim 1, Kabara teaches “It has been observed that a combination of a glyceryl fatty acid ester and a mixture of at least one or more acids selected from the group consisting of fatty acids having from about six to about eighteen carbon atoms demonstrates remarkable preservative activity” and that the preferred glyceryl fatty acid ester compounds include 1-monolinolein (see columns 3-4, lines 57-61 and lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 3, Kabara teaches that the composition is useful as pharmaceutical preservatives and has utility in topical pharmaceutical applications (see column 3, lines 49-51) and can be used in cosmetics (see column 4, lines 31-34).
Kabara does not specifically teach that the composition can be used as a moisturizer or anti-atopic composition. When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation that the composition is for a moisturizing or anti-atopic compostion is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
USDA teaches that glycerol monooleate is specifically used as a moisturizer (see 111-112, page 3). Glycerol monooleate is a synonym for monolinolein.
Therefore it would have been obvious to persons having skill in the art before the effective filing date to create the instant invention because Kabara teaches of compositions with effective amounts of a preservative and 1-monolinolein (a synonym for monolinolein) and USDA teaches that glycerin monooleate is specifically used as a moisturizer.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jon J. Kabara (US6638978B1) and USDA National Organic Program, (Glycerol Monooleate, NOSB TAP Review Compiled by OMRI, September 25, 2001, page 1-16), as applied to claims 1 and 3 above, and further in view of Pubchem (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/1-Monolinolein) and Akio Fukikawa (JP62111654A).
Kabara teaches a composition comprising an effective amount of a preservative and monolinolein, however does not teach that the compounds are from the stems and leaves of carrots.
PubChem teaches 1-monolinolein is a 1-monoglyceride that has octadecadienoyl (linoleoyl) as the acyl group. It has a role as a plant metabolite and an antiviral agent. It is functionally related to a linoleic acid. (see page 1, description).
Fukikawa teaches of compositions which include carrots (Daucus carota L.) and its whole plant including leaves for creating skin atopic compositions (page 6, para. 10 and claim 1) and teaches the invention is useful for atopic dermatitis (see page 5, para. 3).
Therefore it would have been obvious to persons having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use monolinolein which is derived from the stems and leaves of carrots because as PubChem teaches monolinolein is a known plant metabolite. Additionally, the compound would be the same no matter its source and so the selection of where the compound comes from would have been a matter of mere judicious selection. Furthermore, it is prima facie obvious to use prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results and in this case the use of monolinolein as a moisturizer is prima facie obvious. Determining its place of origin is not necessarily inventive nor does it distinguish it over the prior art. It would have further been obvious to use the composition as an atopic composition for dermatitis because Fukikawa teaches of compositions which include carrots (Daucus carota L.) and its whole plant including leaves for creating skin atopic compositions.
Given the prior art there would have been a reasonable expectation of success in arriving at the instant invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3 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
Currently no claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB ANDREW BOECKELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0043. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-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, Terry McKelvey can be reached at 571-272-0775. 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.
JACOB A BOECKELMAN Examiner, Art Unit 1655
/TERRY A MCKELVEY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1655