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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1, 3, 5-11 and 13-16 are pending in the present application. Claims 2, 4, and 12 were previously cancelled. Claim 1 is amended. Support for the amendment is found at page 10 lines 22-25 and page 51 lines 1-9 of the specification. Claim 9 has also been amended for formality.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In this case, Fossum et al teaches a fabric care composition comprising a graft polymer obtainable by grafting (a) a polyalkylene oxide with optionally (b) N-vinylpyrrolidone and (c) a vinyl ester [p. 0012, 0029]. Fossum et al teaches embodiments of the graft polymer comprising (a) an alkylene oxide being based on ethylene oxide, propylene oxide, or butylene oxide; and a monomer mixture of (b) N-vinylpyrrolidone and (c) vinyl acetate, wherein (b) and (c) are grafted onto (a) in the presence of free radical initiators to form side chains (Embodiment I) [p. 0045-0046, 0112]. In embodiment I, Fossum et al teaches the weight ratio of (N-vinylpyrrolidone (b)):( vinyl acetate (c)) is from about 1:0.1 to 1:5, which corresponds to sidechains of 16% to 90% by weight (b), and 9% to 83% (c) [p. 0113]. In an alternative embodiment (Embodiment II), Fossum et al teaches an amphiphilic graft copolymer that aids with dye control of the composition that is preferably free of vinyl pyrrolidine [p. 0084]. In embodiment II, the amphiphilic graft copolymer comprises 25 to 60% by weight of a polyalkylene oxide graft base (a), and 40 to 75% by weight of side chains grafted by free radical polymerization of a vinyl ester component (c), which may be vinyl acetate [p. 0085-0086]. Fossum et al teaches the alkylene oxide units of (a) (EO or PO) may be present as blocks [p. 0035, 0036]. However, Fossum et al fails to teach the number of individual blocks in the block copolymer embodiments.
Patterson et al teaches a laundry detergent composition comprising an ethylene oxide-propylene oxide-ethylene oxide (EO/PO/EO) triblock copolymer [A1 of instant claim 10] [abstract]. Patterson et al teaches these triblock copolymers have the best safety profile of this class of copolymers wherein they especially exhibit minimal skin and eye irritation if accidentally contacted with skin or eye [p. 0046].
Appreciating that embodiments of Fossum et al clearly embrace block copolymers of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide as the polyalkylene oxide graft copolymer backbone, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to select an EO/PO/EO triblock copolymer of Patterson et al as the block copolymer backbone in the composition of Fossum et al as Patterson et al teaches these triblock copolymers have the best safety profile of this class of copolymers wherein they especially exhibit minimal skin and eye irritation if accidentally contacted with skin or eye.
In response to applicant's argument that the prior art is silent with respect to biodegradability, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
A graft copolymer resultant from the combined teachings of Fossum et al and Patterson et al, as discussed above, would be characterized by:
• a triblock copolymer backbone with an ethylene oxide content of 40 to 55 mole% and a propylene oxide content of 45 to 60 mole %; and
• a triblock copolymer backbone having an average molecular weight of 2500 to 3000 Da; and
• grafted sidechains comprising 30 to 80 weight % of the graft copolymer; wherein
• the grafted sidechains comprise of 16% to 90% by weight vinyl pyrrolidone (b), and 9% to 83% vinyl acetate (c) in embodiment I of Fossum et al; or
• the grafted sidechains comprise 100% by weight vinyl ester (c) in embodiment II of Fossum et al.
Accordingly, a skilled artisan would reasonably expect graft copolymers resulting from the combined teachings of Fossum et al and Patterson et al to embrace embodiments capable of exhibiting at least 20% biodegradation at 28 days, as the graft copolymer of the combined teachings of Fossum et al and Patterson et al significantly satisfies the chemical and material limitations (and amounts thereof) of the claimed composition. Furthermore, the examiner notes that inventive polymer 16 of table 5 of the instant specification is embraced by the combined teachings of Fossum et al (embodiment I) and Patterson et al; and inventive polymers 3 and 5 of table 5 of the instant specification are embraced by the combined teachings of Fossum et al (embodiment II) and Patterson et al.
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, 3, 5-11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fossum et al (US 2019/0390142 A1), and further in view of further in view of Patterson et al (EP 3587544; with reference made to US 2021/0115361) as evidenced by Zhang et al (Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 285 (2005) 80–85) and further evidenced by Boeckh et al (US 2009/0176935 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 3, and 5-10:
Fossum et al teaches a fabric care composition comprising a graft polymer obtainable by grafting (a) a polyalkylene oxide with (b) N-vinylpyrrolidone and (c) a vinyl ester [p. 0012, 0029]. Fossum et al discloses that the fabric care compositions may be used as detergent compositions and may be in the form of a unitized dose article, such as a tablet or a pouch [p. 0023–0027]. Fossum et al teaches embodiments of the graft polymer comprising (a) an alkylene oxide being based on ethylene oxide, propylene oxide, or butylene oxide; and a monomer mixture of (b) N-vinylpyrrolidone and (c) vinyl acetate, wherein (b) and (c) are grafted onto (a) in the presence of free radical initiators to form side chains [p. 0045-0046, 0112].
Fossum et al teaches that the polyalkylene oxide backbones may be based on ethylene oxide copolymers, and that suitable copolymers may include copolymers of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide wherein the copolymers may have an ethylene oxide content from about 40 to 99 mole% and a propylene oxide content from about 1 to 60 mole %, and have a number average molecular weight of about 2,000 to about 6,000 Daltons [p. 0035, 0036, 0115]. In addition, Fossum et al teaches the alkylene oxide units of (a) (EO or PO) may be present as blocks [p. 0035, 0036]. However, Fossum et al fails to teach the number of individual blocks in the block copolymer embodiments.
Patterson et al teaches a laundry detergent composition comprising an ethylene oxide-propylene oxide-ethylene oxide (EO/PO/EO) triblock copolymer [A1 of instant claim 10] [abstract]. Patterson et al teaches the EO/PO/EO triblock most preferably has an average propylene oxide content of 25 to 35 propylene oxide units, and an average ethylene oxide content of 10 to 15 ethylene oxide units per ethylene oxide block; which corresponds to an ethylene oxide content of 36 to 55 mole % and a propylene oxide content of 45 to 64 mole % [p. 0046]; and an average molecular weight between 2500 and 3000 [p. 0046].
Patterson et al teaches these triblock copolymers have the best safety profile of this class of copolymers wherein they especially exhibit minimal skin and eye irritation if accidentally contacted with skin or eye [p. 0046]. Additionally, Patterson et al teaches that the EO/PO/EO triblock improves the physical phase stability of the detergent composition and further provides a dual benefit of improving the strength of water-soluble unit dose articles and enhancing grease cleaning performance within compacted water-soluble unit dose articles [p. 0034]. The improved detergent formulation comprises an EO/PO/EO triblock copolymer from the Pluronic series, which are known in the art to be suitable for radical grafting with monomers such as N-vinylpyrrolidone, as evidenced by Zhang et al [p. 0009, 0047; abstract of Zhang et al].
The graft copolymer of Fossum et al is used in laundry detergent compositions and may be in the form of a unitized dose article. Patterson et al teaches that the EO/PO/EO triblock has an excellent safety profile and improves the phase stability as well as grease removal performance of unit dose article detergents. Appreciating that embodiments of Fossum et al clearly embrace block copolymers of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide as the polyalkylene oxide graft copolymer backbone, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to select an EO/PO/EO triblock copolymer of Patterson et al as the block copolymer backbone in the composition of Fossum et al. A skilled artisan would be motivated to select a EO/PO/EO triblock copolymer has a EO/PO content and a molecular weight consistent with the preferred embodiments of both Fossum et al Patterson et al. A graft copolymer in agreement with both teachings as discussed above would be characterized by:
a triblock copolymer backbone with an ethylene oxide content of 40 to 55 mole% and a propylene oxide content of 45 to 60 mole %; and
a triblock copolymer backbone having an average molecular weight of 2500 to 3000 Da; and
grafted sidechains comprising 30 to 80 weight % of the graft copolymer.
Fossum et al teaches embodiments wherein a monomer mixture of (b) N-vinylpyrrolidone and (c) vinyl acetate, wherein (b) and (c) are grafted onto (a) the polyoxyalkylene base in the presence of free radical initiators to form side chains [p. 0045-0046, 0112]. Fossum et al teaches (a):(b+c) may range from 1:0.4 to 1:1.3, which corresponds to a graft copolymer of about 40% to 70% by weight graft base, and 30% to 60% by weight side chains [p. 0040-0041]. Furthermore, Fossum et al teaches the weight ratio of (b):(c) is from about 1:0.1 to 1:5, which corresponds to sidechains of 16% to 90% by weight (b), and 9% to 83% (c) [p. 0113]. Fossum et al further teaches the graft copolymers have a relatively low degree of branching and have an average number of grafting sites of 0.1 to 0.4 per 50 alkylene oxide groups [p. 0043]. Fossum et al further teaches the polydispersity of the graft copolymers may be from about 1.5 to about 2.2, but is silent with respect to the weight average molecular weight of the graft copolymers [p. 0044].
However, Fossum et al further teaches an additional amphiphilic graft copolymer that aids with dye control of the composition and is preferably free of vinyl pyrrolidine [p. 0084]. The amphiphilic graft copolymer comprises 25 to 60% by weight of a water soluble polyalkylene oxide graft base, and 40 to 75% by weight of side chains grafted by free radical polymerization of a vinyl ester component [p. 0086]. Fossum et al teaches these amphiphilic graft copolymers have a low degree of branching and have most preferably 0.1 to 0.4 graft sites per 50 alkylene oxide units [p. 0087]. Fossum et al teaches the Mw of the amphiphilic graft polymers is preferably 6000 to 45,000 Da[p. 0088].
A skilled artisan would reasonably expect the inventive copolymers of Fossum et al to have a Mw similar to the amphiphilic graft copolymer as the relative amounts, by weight, of polymer base and side chains of the inventive graft copolymer are substantially similar to those of the amphiphilic graft copolymer, and both have a preferred average number of grafting sites of 0.1 to 0.4 per 50 alkylene oxide groups. Furthermore, when considering the graft copolymer of Fossum et al prepared with the EO/PO/EO triblock graft base taught by Patterson et al, having an average molecular weight of 2500 to 3000 Da, a skilled artisan would reasonably predict a Mw on the lower end of the 6,000 to 45,000 Da range, particularly when taking into account that Fossum et al teaches the graft copolymer is about 40% to 70% by weight graft base, and 30% to 60% by weight side chains. . In light of this, one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would expect embodiments of Fossum et al in view of Patterson et al to obviously satisfy the claimed Mw range of 800 to 10,000 Da. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Considering the OG calculation of instant claim 1, an embodiment of this graft copolymer comprising a triblock copolymer backbone of 40 mole% EO, 60 mole% PO, having a number average molecular weight of 2750 Da, and grafted sidechains comprising 40 weight % of the graft copolymer would have an OG = 6.02. Furthermore, the same polymer would have an FJ = 1.29, further evidencing the teachings of Fossum et al in view of Patterson et al read over the instantly claimed graft copolymer.
Regarding the process of claim 1, Fossum et al teaches the graft polymers may be prepared by grafting the suitable polyalkylene oxides of component (a) with the monomers of component (b) and/or (c) in the presence of free radical initiators [p. 0045]. Fossum et al teaches graft polymerization may also be carried out semi continuously by first introducing a portion, for example 10%, of the mixture of (a) polyalkylene oxide to be polymerized, at least one monomer of group (b) and/or ( c) and initiator, heating to polymerization temperature and, after the polymerization has started, adding the remainder of the mixture to be polymerized at a rate commensurate with the rate of polymerization [p. 0047]. Fossum et al teaches the graft polymerization may be carried out in a solvent and exemplifies their preparation in ethyl acetate [p. 0049, 0159].
Fossum et al exemplifies the preparation of graft copolymers with tert-butyl perpivalate as an initiator which, as evidenced by Boeckh et al, has a half-life from 20 to 500 minutes [Fossum et al p. 0159; Boeckh et al p. 0049-0050].
Regarding claim 11:
Fossum et al teaches the weight ratio of (b):(c) is from about 1:0.1 to 1:5, which corresponds to sidechains of 16% to 90% by weight N-vinylpyrrolidone (b), and 9% to 83% vinyl acetate (c) [p. 0113]. In addition, in the examples of Fossum et al, (b) and (c) are the only monomers employed, and in 11 of the 13 examples (c) makes up 50% by weight or greater of the monomers used to prepare the grafted side chains [table 1]. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
Moreover, Fossum et al teaches an alternative embodiment wherein the compositions include an amphiphilic graft copolymer, based on water-soluble polyalkylene oxide (a) as a graft base and side chains formed by polymerization of a vinyl acetate component (c), where the amphiphilic graft copolymer is free of vinyl pyrrolidone components [p. 0084-0085].
In addition, Fossum et al teaches that after the graft polymerization, the graft polymer sidechains may optionally be subjected to a partial hydrolysis [p. 0053].
Regarding claims 13-16:
Fossum et al teaches the graft copolymer may be included in fabric care compositions [p. 0023]. The fabric care composition may be in the form of a liquid composition, a granular composition, a single-compartment pouch, a multicompartment pouch, a sheet, a fibrous article, a tablet, a bar, flake, or a mixture thereof and the composition can be selected from a liquid, solid, or combination thereof [p. 0025].
Fossum et al teaches the fabric care composition may further comprise a treatment adjunct [p. 0054]. These treatment adjuncts may include a surfactant system, fatty acids and/or salts thereof, enzymes, encapsulated benefit agents, soil release polymers, hueing agents, builders, chelating agents, dye transfer inhibiting agents, dispersants, enzyme stabilizers, catalytic materials, bleaching agents, bleach catalysts, bleach activators, polymeric dispersing agents, soil removal/anti-redeposition agents, polymeric dispersing agents, polymeric grease cleaning agents, brighteners, suds suppressors, dyes, hueing agents, perfume, structure elasticizing agents, fabric softeners, carriers, fillers, hydrotropes, solvents, antimicrobial agents and/or preservatives, neutralizers and/or pH adjusting agents, processing aids, fillers, rheology modifiers or structurants, opacifiers, pearlescent agents, pigments, anti-corrosion and/or anti-tarnishing agents, and mixtures thereof [p. 0056].
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 HOLLEY GRACE HESTER whose telephone number is (703)756-5435. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00AM -5:00PM.
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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571) 272-1302. 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.
/HOLLEY GRACE HESTER/Examiner, Art Unit 1766
/RANDY P GULAKOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights