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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s response from 8/19/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Applicant claims to have overcome through claim amendments all objections. However, it has failed to do so with respect to claims 9 and 22. If it is not immediately clear to Applicant what the issue is, it is that claim 9 recites “didecyldimethyl” as one word, and claim 22 recites it as two words: “didecyl dimethyl”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant’s claim amendments overcome all rejections, in view of which this rejection is hereby withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments have been carefully considered, but have not been found to be persuasive.
The gist of Applicant’s arguments can be found in the following section:
PNG
media_image1.png
250
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The Examiner agrees that CQ discloses a composition with more than a single type of antimicrobial agent. However, she notes that this an obviousness rejection which was accordingly modified with Lonza, where Lonza does disclose a single type of antimicrobial agent.
The Examiner further disagrees with Applicant’s characterization of Lonza. Applicant fails to provide any support whatsoever for its position that at best the skilled artisan would be motivated to add the Lonza component to the existing CQ mixture. To the contrary, Lonza very clearly discloses using its product alone. See, e.g., the corrosion testing results on p. 2, which show the use of Carboquat® H.
Moreover, “the test of obviousness is not express suggestion of the claimed invention in any or all of the references but rather what the references taken collectively would suggest to those of ordinary skill in the art presumed to be familiar with them.” In re Rosselet, 347 F.2d 847, 851 (C.C.P.A. 1965). This motivation need not be express and may flow from the prior art references themselves, the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art, or from the nature of the problem to be solved. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Philip Morris Inc., 229 F.3d 1120, 1125 (Fed. Cir. 2000). See also In re Beattie, 974 F.2d 1309, 1312 (Fed. Cir. 1992) ("As long as some motivation or suggestion to combine the references is provided by the prior art taken as a whole, the law does not require that the references be combined for the reasons contemplated by the inventor.")
Applicant has also argued that there are unexpected results of its composition compared to CQ, but has failed to provide any such results. See In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1470–71 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (quoting In re Soni, 54 F.3d 746, 750 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (“naked attorney argument is ‘insufficient to establish unexpected results.’”)). Applicants also do not submit any statement as to unexpected results through other evidentiary submissions, such as a declaration under 37 C.F.R. § 1.132. In addition, there are no comparative test results present in the specification either.
For the foregoing reasons, the rejection is maintained.
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities: they have inconsistent spelling. Claim 9 recites “didecyldimethyl ammonium quaternary cation”. Claim 22 recites “didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride.”
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 1-7, 9-20, 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anonymous, Technical Bulletin: Clean Quick® Quaternary Broad Range Sanitizer, 2011-04-07, updated February 14, 2013, pages 1-2 (“CQ”1, of record), and further in view of Anonymours, Lonza Product Information Carboquat® H, USAD-33662, 2009-06-08, pages 1-3 (“Lonza”, of record).
CQ describes the product and use of "Clean Quick", which is a disinfectant concentrate that contains a single type of antimicrobial agent, namely a quaternary ammonium cation. The antimicrobial agent has three dimethyl dialkyl ammonium chloride compositions of claim 1 in concentrations of amounting to 8.448%, of which one of the three ingredients is specifically Applicant’s claim 22 ingredient dodecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride. (page 1, "Active Ingredients", see the first three).
PNG
media_image2.png
119
327
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It also contains alkyl (C14, 50%, C12, 40%, C16, 10%) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride, which makes up 5.632%. The issue presented is alkyl (C14, 50%, C12, 40%, C16, 10%) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride a quaternary ammonium compound, which is included within the meaning of a quaternary ammonium compound of Applicant’s claims? The answer is that it is not bialkyl per se, but as can be seen from the structure of it, it is a blend of alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chlorides with C12, C14 and C16 chain lengths. Alkyl (C14, 50%, C12, 40%, C16, 10%) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride is what is commonly known as Lysol®- a widely used cationic surfactant and quaternary ammonium compound, which is also known by the alternative name benzalkonium chloride.
Of note, Applicant’s specification does not preclude benzalkonium compounds. See, e.g., “[0024] In other embodiments, however, the carbonate/bicarbonate salts of quaternary ammonium cations may be selected from dioctyldimethylammonium carbonate, decyloctyldimethylammonium carbonate, benzalkonium carbonate, benzethonium carbonate, stearalkonium carbonate, cetrimonium carbonate, behentrimonium carbonate, dioctyldimethylammonium bicarbonate, decyloctyldimethylammonium bicarbonate, benzalkonium bicarbonate, benzethonium bicarbonate, stearalkonium bicarbonate, cetrimonium bicarbonate, behentrimonium bicarbonate, and mixtures of one or more such carbonate salts.”
Thus, the dialkyl dimethyl ammonium chloride ingredients are 60% total, and the additional ingredient alkyl (C14, 50%, C12, 40%, C16, 10%) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride is 40%.
Before use, this concentrate is diluted with water at 1:256 (550 ppm active quot, which equals 330 ppm dimethyl dialkyl ammonium chloride ppm), 1:352 (400 ppm active quot, which equals 240 ppm dimethyl dialkyl ammonium chloride ppm), 1:704 (200 ppm active quot, which equals, and 1:938 (200 ppm active quot, which equals 120 ppm dimethyl dialkyl ammonium chloride ppm) (page 1, "Dilution Use"). This discloses wherein the disinfectant composition contains water in an amount greater than 99% by weight, per Applicant’s claim 23.
It is used to clean hard surfaces by application with a cloth, mop, or sponge (i.e. an adjacent surface) or through application onto a surface followed by rubbing with a brush, sponge or cloth, and for non-food surfaces, it is not necessary to rinse with potable water. It can also be sprayed. (page 1, "General Use Directions").
The disinfectant is effective against bacteria and viruses (page 2, "Efficacy"). They include, inter alia, norovirus, coronavirus, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
Since CQ discloses the same method with the same composition, it will achieve the same result of producing a 3-log reduction, per Applicant’s claims 5 and 6, and the same growth on an AOAC germicidal spray test, per Applicant’s claim 7.
The disinfecting composition does not contain a further chelating agent, or a further surfactant, or a further pH adjuster or basic compound. In accordance with the above, in the absence of a further pH adjuster or basic compound, it also has the pH range of Applicant’s claim 13.
As was noted above, CQ is not limited to just a single type of an antimicrobial agent. CQ further does not disclose a carbonate or bicarbonate salt of a quaternary ammonium cation, per Applicant’s claim 19. CQ further does not specifically disclose a dilution with water of about 120 to 1 about 135 to 1.
Lonza discloses that Carboquat® H is Didecyl dimethyl ammonium carbonate/ Didecyl dimethyl ammonium bicarbonate. It discloses that it is its intended use is an active ingredient raw material for antimicrobial formulations such as disinfectants and sanitizers used on hard, nonporous surfaces. (p. 1). Lonza reports that it is freely soluble in water.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of CQ and Lonza in order to practice Applicant’s claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to do so because the art discloses practicing Applicant’s claimed method with either a single ingredient, or in combination with other quaternary ammonium compounds, for the same use of disinfecting of surfaces. With respect to rations of dilution with water, it is noted that CQ discloses varying the ratio, and showing efficacy across a broad spectrum. As the ratio is a known result-effective variable it would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art before the effective filing date to optimize it in order to optimize the disinfecting properties across an array of bacteria and/ or viruses.
Other relevant art
The Examiner also notes for the record the following prior art from Applicant’s newly filed IDS from 8/19/2026, over which no rejections were made solely in view of its cumulative nature.
-20170130283 to Franzim et al. (“Franzim”)
Franzim relates to a process for preserving raw/fresh hides and skins is disclosed. In one embodiment, the hides and skins are treated with an antimicrobial composition containing a carbonate and/or bicarbonate salt of a quaternary ammonium cation.
1. A method for preserving animal hides or skins comprising treating the hides or skins with an antimicrobial composition, the antimicrobial composition containing one or more antimicrobial agents comprising a salt of a quaternary ammonium cation, the salt of a quaternary ammonium cation comprising: a) a carbonate/bicarbonate salt of a quaternary ammonium cation; or b) a halide salt of a quaternary ammonium cation combined with a surfactant.
2. A method as defined in claim 1, wherein the salt of a quaternary ammonium cation comprises the carbonate/bicarbonate salt of a quaternary ammonium cation.
3. A method as defined in claim 1, wherein the salt of a quaternary ammonium cation comprises at least one di C.sub.8-C.sub.12 alkyl ammonium carbonate/bicarbonate.
4. A method as defined in claim 1, wherein the salt of a quaternary ammonium cation comprises didecyl dimethyl ammonium carbonate/bicarbonate.
[0046] In order to treat hides and skins in accordance with the present disclosure, in one embodiment, the antimicrobial composition is initially formulated as a concentrate and then diluted with water prior to application to the hides or skins. The concentrate is diluted using a biocidal effective amount or concentration of one or more antimicrobial agents. A biocidal effective amount is an amount effective to inhibit the growth of or to kill one or more microorganisms that may cause rot or other microbial degradation. In one embodiment, the concentration of the one or more antimicrobial agents may be greater than about 5 ppm, such as greater than about 20 ppm, such as greater than about 100 ppm, such as greater than about 500 ppm…
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SVETLANA M IVANOVA whose telephone number is (571)270-3277. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00.
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, Kortney L. Klinkel can be reached at (571) 270-5239. 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.
/SVETLANA M IVANOVA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1627
1 Applicant has made only the first of two pages of CQ of record. The Examiner accordingly makes the entire reference of record.
Prosecution Insights