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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/12/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Receipt of Remarks/Amendments filed on 01/12/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-8, 10-12, 14-16, 18-19, and 22 are cancelled. Claims 9 and 20-21 have been amended. Claims 9, 13, 17, and 20-21 are presented for examination on the merits for patentability.
Rejection(s) not reiterated from the previous Office Action are hereby withdrawn. The following rejections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set of rejections presently being applied to the instant application.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 01/12/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of 17995731 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 9, 13, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yuan et al. (US 2018/0133130 A1; Of record), hereinafter Yuan, in view of Purkayastha, S. (US 2014/0023750 A1, Of record), hereinafter Purkayastha, and Tachdjian et al. (US 8,541,421 B2), hereinafter Tachdjian as evidenced by Shigeto et al. (Bioscience, biotechnology, and biochemistry 84.2 (2020): 421-427), hereinafter Shigeto.
Regarding Claims 9, and 17, Yuan teaches oral care compositions comprising potassium peroxysulfate whitening agent (Claims 1 and 6). The oral care composition further comprises inter alia a flavoring and a sweetener common to oral care compositions (Claim 11; [0038]). Useful flavoring includes spearmint and peppermint oils that enhances taste, as well as those that provide cooling effects, rendering Claim 20 obvious [0081]. Yuan teaches embodiments where the sweeteners in the oral care composition include sucralose and saccharin [0083]. Yuan teaches oral care compositions to include toothpaste [0061]. Peppermint oil contains dihydromintolactone as evidenced by Shigeto (Table 1; Fig. 1).
Yuan does not expressly teach the 4-amino-5,6-dimethylthieno-[2,3-d]pyrimidin-2(1H)-one, and the glucosylated natural steviol glycosides.
Purkayastha teaches multiple examples of food and beverages comprising glucosyl steviol glycoside (GSG) and provides the motivation to add GSG to products, describing how it enhances the intensity of taste and flavor profile in a food or beverage products and how it showed synergy with natural sweetener Rebaudioside A (Reb A) and synthetic sweeteners sucralose, acesulfame and aspartame (Abstract; Examples 1-15). Furthermore, GSG can reduce erythritol usage, replacing erythritol, and therefore provide a balanced, rounded sweetness flavor [0099].
It would also have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Yuan with Purkayastha and add glucosyl steviol glycoside arriving at the claimed composition with enhanced taste. Specifically, one would add GSG to enhance the intensity of taste and flavor profile the oral care composition of Yuan.
Tachdjian is in a related field, and teaches methods of enhancing sweet taste in compositions with substituted thieno[2,3-d]pyrimidine (Abstract). Tachdjian teaches how bitter, sweet, and amino acid taste are triggered by activation of two types of specific receptors T2Rs and T1Rs (Col. 2, lines 50-56). Tachdjian discloses a chemosensory receptor ligand enhancer having structural Formula (I), which encompasses 4-amino-5,6-dimethylthieno-[2,3-d]pyrimidin-2(1H)-one (Claims 1 and 10; Col. 149 structure). Tachdjian teaches an embodiment wherein sucrose or sucralose enhancers interact with a chemosensory receptor in the presence of sucrose or sucralose (Col. 29, lines 18-22). Typically, one or more of the chemosensory receptor modifiers or chemosensory receptor ligand modifiers are added to the comestible or medicinal product, optionally in the presence of known sweeteners to increase the sweet taste (Col. 93, lines 9-23). The results of human taste tests with compound 149 in Table 6 indicates that 100 uM compound in 100 ppm sucralose has sweetness equivalent to about between 200 and 300 ppm sucralose; Table 7 indicates that 100 uM compound 149 alone has no sweetness, and therefore can be defined as a true sweet enhancer (Col. 149, lines 62-67). Tachdjian teaches a concentration of the compound in the range of 0.0001 to 100 ppm, overlapping with the claimed range (Claim 12).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the sweetness enhancer 4--amino-5,6-dimethylthieno-[2,3-d]pyrimidin-2(1H)-one of Tachdjian to enhance the sweet taste in the composition of Yuan with reasonable expectation that it will balance the bitter taste of the peroxymonosulfate in the oral care composition.
PNG
media_image1.png
274
291
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 13 and 17, Yuan teaches an embodiment wherein the particularly useful whitening agent is a triple salt mixture comprising potassium hydrogen peroxymonosulfate, potassium hydrogen sulfate, and potassium sulfate [0041]. Furthermore, mixtures consisting of potassium hydrogen peroxymonosulfate, potassium hydrogen sulfate, potassium sulfate, potassium peroxydisulfate, and magnesium carbonate is already commercially used, and found to be fairly stable in storage [0041].
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yuan, as applied to Claims 9 and 20 above, and in further view of Huboux et al (US 2020/0157083 A1, Of record).
Yuan is does not teach the cooling enhancing compounds in Claim 21.
Huboux relates that one of the most sought ingredients in the flavor field are the ones imparting a cold or a cooling impression providing to the consumer product a freshness and a cleanness sensation [0003]. Huboux discloses a composition comprising at least one compound of formula (I), wherein the compound is chosen from 4 compounds including N-(1H-pyrazol-5-yl)-N-(thiophen-2-ylmethyl)-2-(p-tolyloxy)acetamide (FEMA 4809), and can be combined with other cooling agents (Claim 12; [0063]). Huboux expressly teaches a flavoring composition comprising the instantly claimed N-(1H-pyrazol-5-yl)-N-(thiophen-2-ylmethyl)-2-(p-tolyloxy)acetamide, along with mint, peppermint oil etc. which may be added to an oral care product (Examples 4-5). Huboux relates that the compound is useful for flavoring in toothpaste (Claim 18). Huboux teaches preparation of several polymorphs of compound of formula (I) with FEMA 4809 being the most stable polymorph [0146].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Huboux with Yuan and add cooling agent 2-(p-tolyloxy)-N-(1H-pyrazol-5-yl)-N-((thiophen-2-yl)methyl)acetamide to its toothpaste composition with reasonable expectation that the compound would impart a cooling impression providing to the consumer product a freshness and a cleanness sensation.
Response to Remarks:
Applicant amended Claim 9, and remarks that the amendment now stating that the off taste comes from alkali salt of peroxymonosulfate, and that the product is a toothpaste, overcomes the rejection over Shigemura, Shigefuji, Purkayastha and Yuan.
With the amendment, the Examiner found that Yuan is now the closest prior art and rejects the claims over Yuan, in view of Purkayastha and Tachdjian. Yuan teaches oral care compositions comprising potassium peroxysulfate whitening agent, which reads on the alkali salt of peroxymonosulfate, and teaches that the oral care composition further comprises inter alia a flavoring and a sweetener common to oral care compositions including spearmint and peppermint oils that enhances taste, as well as those that provide cooling effects. Yuan teaches oral care compositions to include toothpaste.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE Y SILVERMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2038. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 10-6 EST.
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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached on (571) 270-3475. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/J.Y.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1792
/ERIK KASHNIKOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1792