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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-14, 24 and 25, in the reply filed on March 16, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the search and examination of both Group I and Group II would not be a serious burden on the examiner. This is not found persuasive because the examiner respectfully maintains that the separate and distinct inventions would require separate and distinct searches.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 15-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on March 16, 2026.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10-14 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin, US 2015/0141315.
Jin, US 2015/0141315, discloses a process to recover or increase the water absorbency of a polyester textile (i.e., increase hydrophilicity) by incorporating a polyester soil release polymer and a quaternary ammonium compound in the water and/or rinse cycle of a laundry operation (see abstract and paragraphs 10-11). It is further taught by Jin that suitable soil release polymers include polyethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate copolymers, such as REPEL-O-TEX, which is the preferred soil release polymer identified in the instant specification (see paragraphs 29-32 of Jin and page 7, lines 16-19 of the instant specification), that the soil release polymer is used in the composition in an amount of 0.1-10% by weight (see paragraph 37), that the composition further contains surfactants (see paragraph 68), that a preferred composition contains 5% by weight of an ester quat, 0.5% by weight of REPEL-O-TEX, and water to balance (see paragraph 82), that the vertical wicking of the treated fabric increases by 130 centimeters in 10 minutes after being treated with the polyethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate copolymer REPEL-O-TEX (see paragraphs 88-92 and Tables 1-2), and that the polyethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate copolymer REPEL-O-TEX is dried on to the surface of the fabric (i.e., maturing to the surface; see paragraphs 83-87), per the requirements of the instant invention.
Although Jin generally discloses a process to recover or increase the water absorbency of a polyester textile by treatment with a polyethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate copolymer, the reference does not require the specific wicking rate test method step required in the instant claims.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have formulated a process to recover or increase the water absorbency of a polyester textile by treatment with a polyethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate copolymer, wherein a textile exhibiting a wicking rate of less than 10 mm2/second prior to treatment exhibits a wicking rate of greater than 10 mm2/second, since such a process to recover or increase the water absorbency of a polyester textile by treatment with a polyethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate copolymer to improve the vertical wicking rate of a fabric fall within the scope of those taught by Jin. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success, because such a process to recover or increase the water absorbency of a polyester textile by treatment with a polyethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate copolymer to improve the vertical wicking rate of a fabric is expressly suggested by the Jin disclosure and therefore is an obvious formulation.
Claims 1-7, 9-14 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futterer et al, US 2011/0172136.
Futterer et al, US 2011/0172136, discloses laundry detergent compositions that provide soil release benefits to all fabrics by rendering the fabrics more hydrophilic comprising an organophosphorus soil release agent and a non-cotton secondary soil release agent (see abstract and paragraphs 30 and 34). It is further taught by Futterer et al that the composition contains a surfactant (see paragraph 32), and 0.01-10% by weight of a copolymer of ethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate (see paragraphs 536 and 540), that the composition is used in a process to treat a hydrophobic surface that has a water contact angle of greater than 90 degrees and render the surface hydrophilic resulting in a water contact angle of less than 90 degrees (see paragraphs 110-114), that a preferred non-cotton secondary soil release agent is REPEL-O-TEX, which is a preferred soil release polymer identified in the instant specification (see paragraph 576 of Futterer et al and page 7, lines 16-19 of the instant specification), and that the fabrics are treated in an aqueous bath, followed by drying (i.e., maturing to the surface; see Examples 1-5), per the requirements of the instant invention.
Although Futterer et al generally discloses a laundry detergent composition used in a process that provides soil release benefits to all fabrics by rendering the fabrics more hydrophilic comprising a copolymer of ethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate, the reference does not require such a process for treating laundry containing this component with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have formulated a laundry detergent composition used in a process that provides soil release benefits to all fabrics by rendering the fabrics more hydrophilic, as taught by Futterer et al, that contained a copolymer of ethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate, because such a process for treating laundry with this component fall within the scope of those taught by Futterer et al. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success, because such a laundry detergent composition used in a process that provides soil release benefits to all fabrics by rendering the fabrics more hydrophilic containing a copolymer of ethylene terephthalate and polyoxyethylene terephthalate is expressly suggested by the Futterer et al disclosure and therefore is an obvious formulation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN P MRUK whose telephone number is (571)272-1321. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:00am-5:30pm Monday-Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Brown-Pettigrew, can be reached on 571-272-2817. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/BRIAN P MRUK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Brian P Mruk
April 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights