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 .
This office action is in response to applicant’s claims filed February 3, 2023.
Claims 1-16 are pending. Claims 1-6and 9-13 have been amended. Claims 14-16 are new.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 and 11-13 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1 and 11 should recite “in a tanning industry” in line 1 to be grammatically correct. Similarly, Claims 2 and 12 should recite “is a retanning step” in line 2 and Claims 3 and 13 should recite “is a fatliquoring step” in line 2 to be grammatically correct. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because The numbers and labels of the axes and Figures are too small to be clearly read. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-6 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: Claim 1 and 11 describe methods of “using” a hemp oil derivative or composition thereof but do not describe any actual method steps of how it is used. The preamble states “for leather working in tanning industry” but never describes any essential method steps for example of applying it to leather or how the composition is actually used. The omission of the essential method steps renders the claims indefinite. Claims 2-6 and 12-16 are also rejected for being dependent upon claims 1 or 11 and inheriting the same deficiency.
Claims 6-13 and 15-16 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. Claims 6,7,10 and 16 recite “phosphate (C8-C24) fatty alcohol” but the placing of the carbon number of the fatty alcohol group in parenthesis renders it unclear if this limitation is required or a preferred optional embodiment. For examination purposes, the examiner interpreted the claim to require a phosphate fatty alcohol with 8-24 carbons in the alkyl portion of the fatty alcohol and also having 1 to 2 hydroxyl groups. Claims 8,9,11-13 and 15 are also rejected for being dependent upon claim 7 and inheriting the same deficiency.
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.
Claims 1,3-5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Papalos (US 3,764,358).
Papalos teaches methods for fatliquoring leather (column 1, lines 45-51) comprising using sulfated hemp oil (column 4, lines 38 and 60-67) wherein the degree of sulfation is about 4% to about 11% preferably 5.5-9% in a fatliquoring step (column 7, lines 43-50).
Papalos doe not teach all the claimed embodiments in a single example but one of ordinary skill in the art could arrive at the claimed invention by selecting from the teachings of Papalos.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select sulfated hemp oil with a degree of sulfation of 2-10% to be used in fatliquoring leather as Papalos teaches unsaturated oils such as hemp seed oil are effectively sulfated to a degree of preferably 5.5-9% to fatliquor leather for the benefit being an alternative to sperm oil which is harvested from endangered whale species. Papalos teaches fatliquoring with these compositions replenishes natural oils in the leather which have been removed in the tanning operation. Papalos teaches these compositions applied in fatliquoring methods to leather provide superior qualities including improved surface feel.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Papalos (US 3,764,358) in view of Komforth (WO 2013/157941).
Papalos is relied upon as set forth above.
Papalos does not teach retanning.
Komforth teaches retanning and fatliquoring leather in one step (page 4, 26-28) wherein the fatliquoring agent is present in the retanning composition ((page 5, lines 13-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the fatliquoring sulfated hemp oil of Papalos in the retanning step of leather processing as Komforth teaches it is beneficial to combine the retanning and fatliquoring compositions into a single blend to perform a combined step of fatliquoring and retanning of leather resulting in a more ecofriendly process which uses less chemicals, saves on the amount of water and energy consumed as well as substantially reduces the time required for treatment (page 3, lines 18-30).
Claims 6-11,13,15 and 16 are is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Papalos (US 3,764,358) in view of Debaremdik (SU1214765A).
Papalos is relied upon as set forth above.
Papalos does not teach phosphate (C8-C24) fatty alcohol having from 1 to 2 hydroxyl groups or phosphate (C8-C24) fatty alcohol triethanolamine.
Debaremdik teaches leather fatliquoring compositions advantageously comprise triethanolamine salts of alkyl-phosphoric acids based on 10-20C fatty alcohol fraction for the benefit of good emulsification of the fatliquor and providing good quality leather (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the compositions and methods of Papalos by adding triethanolamine salts of alkyl-phosphoric acids based on 10-20C fatty alcohol fraction to the fatliquor as taught by Debaremdik for the benefit of good emulsification of the fatliquor and providing good quality leather.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Papalos (US 3,764,358) in view of Debaremdik (SU1214765A) and further in view of Komforth (WO 2013/157941).
Papalos and Debaremdik are relied upon as set forth above.
Papalos and Debaremdik do not teach retanning.
Komforth teaches retanning and fatliquoring leather in one step (page 4, 26-28) wherein the fatliquoring agent is present in the retanning composition ((page 5, lines 13-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the fatliquoring sulfated hemp oil in the retanning step of leather processing of Papalos and Debaremdik as Komforth teaches it is beneficial to combine the retanning and fatliquoring compositions into a single blend to perform a combined step of fatliquoring and retanning of leather resulting in a more ecofriendly process which uses less chemicals, saves on the amount of water and energy consumed as well as substantially reduces the time required for treatment (page 3, lines 18-30).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMINA S KHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5573. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5:30pm 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 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 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.
/AMINA S KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761