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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. With regards to claims 6 and 18 , the claims state that the polymer has “molecular weight” but does not specify if the molecular weight is weight average or number average. Claim 9 recites the limitation "the carboxylic acid" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 10 recites the limitation "the amine" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 11 recites the limitation "the ester" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 12 recites the limitation "the phenol" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 13 recites the limitation "the carbonyl compound" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim s 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chevet et al (US 10,272,025) . With regards to claim s 1 and 14 , Chevet teaches a perfuming composition (abstract) that contains 40 to 90% ethanol, 0 to 30% water (reading on the claimed solvent system as defined in the dependent claims and specification), 3 to 40% of a perfume (reading on the claimed benefit agent), and 1 to 10% of a vinylpyrrolidone copolymer (column 3, lines 18-25). Chevet further teaches the addition of antioxidants including BHT (column 6, lines 58-63) (as applicant cite in the dependent claims and specification as reading on the claimed enabler). Chevet does not teach the concentration of the BHT . However, generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. See MPEP 2144.05. Further, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 124 (CCPA 1955). In this case, one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention would know to alter the amount of the stability of the composition with the desired reactivity. With regards to claim 2 , Chevet teaches the solvent to include ethanol and water (column 3, lines 18-25) reading on hydroalcoholic. With regards to claim 3 , Chevet teaches the solvent to be ethanol (column 3, lines 18-25). With regards to claim s 4 and 16 , Chevet teaches the solvent to include ethanol and water wherein the amount of ethanol is 96% and 4% water in relation to the total amount of solvent (column 8, lines 31-39). With regards to claim s 5 and 17 , Chevet teaches the benefit agent to be present in a perfume concentrate and to be present at a concentration from 3 to 40% (column 3, lines 18-25). With regards to claim 6 , Chevet teaches the weight-average molecular weight of the polymer to be from 15,000 and 600,000 (column 4, lines 14-19). With regards to claim s 7 and 19 , Chevet teaches the compound reading on the claimed enabler to be BHT (column 6, lines 58-63) which has a log P of 5.1 to 5.27. With regards to claim s 8 , 12, and 20 , Chevet teaches the compound reading on the claimed enabler to be BHT (column 6, lines 58-63) which reads on a phenol compound. With regards to claim s 9 -11 and 13 , the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims do not require the presence of the compounds being further limited by these claims as only one of the components are required. With regards to claim 15 , Chevet teaches the compound reading on the claimed benefit agent to be a perfume concentrate (column 3, lines 18-25). With regards to claim 18 , Chevet teaches the polymer to be a polymer of vinylpyrrolidone (column 3, lines 18-25). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JESSICA WHITELEY whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-5203 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 8 - 5:00 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Joseph Del Sole can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 5712721130 . 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 571-272-100 0. /JESSICA WHITELEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763