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 Amendment
Amendment filed 3/30/2026 has been entered. Pending claims 1-19 are addressed below. Claim 20 is withdrawn.
Previous Election/Restrictions
Claim(s) 20 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/21/2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention group 1 (claims 1-19) and species 2 (Figs. 6-8) is acknowledged.
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 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 1-7, 9, 10, 12-14, 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hart (US20040188535) in view of Fernandez Prieto (US 20190022265).
Regarding claim 1, Hart discloses a volatile composition dispenser (figs. 3-4) comprising:
a solid article (7, same article shown in fig. 3 is labeled in fig. 1; par. 35-36) comprising a volatile composition (par. 28, 32-33) and a peripheral evaporative surface (exposed surface of article 7 that is on the peripheral of shaft 9; see annotation below),
wherein the solid article (7) is capable of shrinkage relative to the peripheral evaporative surface from an initial size (as shown in fig. 3) to a reduced size (as shown in fig. 4) smaller than the initial size upon exposure of the solid article to the environment in an interior space (see figs. 3-4; par. 36)
wherein the solid article (7) is characterized by a shrinkage in a direction away (see figs. 3-4: the gel shrinks inwardly, therefore away from its exposed surface) from the peripheral evaporative surface
a housing (see annotation below) configured for receiving the solid article; and
a visual indicator (9 or top end of 9, which is an inner surface of the cited housing) located on an inner surface of the housing (see annotated figure) proximal to the peripheral evaporative surface of the solid article (par. 36: “a visual cue consisting of a shaft ( 9) that extends from the inner surface of the end wall (2)”; shaft 9 is adjacent exposed area of the solid article 7; there is no definition in the disclosure requiring the term “proximal” to be within a specific distance);
PNG
media_image1.png
584
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the dispenser has a first configuration (as shown in fig. 3) wherein the solid article conceals the visual indicator such that it is not visually perceptible (shaft 9 is covered by the housing and gel 7, and not visible from the view shown in fig. 3), and
a second configuration (as shown in fig. 4) wherein shrinkage of at least a portion of the solid article from the initial size to the reduced size reveals at least a portion of the visual indicator for indicating a state of use of the dispenser (par. 36; see fig. 4).
Hart is silent regarding the shrinkage from the peripheral evaporative surface is greater than 1% to less than 40%.
However, Fernandez Prieto discloses a comparable solid article (cross-linked gel composition) configured to have shrinkage in the order from 10%-30% by surface area (par. 16). The disclosed cross-linked gel exhibit more uniform release of the hydrophobic material.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the teachings of Fernandez Prieto to substitute Hart’s gel with the cross-linked gel taught by Fernandez Prieto with shrinkage from the peripheral evaporative surface from 10%-30%, which is greater than 1% to less than 40%. Doing so would facilitate a more uniform release profile of the hydrophobic material (see paragraph 16).
Note: all references made in parenthesis hereafter are referencing the primary reference, unless otherwise stated.
Regarding claims 2 and 14, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 1, wherein Hart does not specify the shrinkage is from 3% to 30%, at the end of a time period of from 1 to 75 days (claim 2); wherein the shrinkage is from 4% to 20%, at the end of a time period of from 1 to 75 days (claim 14).
However, Fernandez Prieto discloses various examples of the cross-linked gel composition, shown in the data table for Example 5 (column 11), wherein another table below paragraph 147 shows the percent of release or shrinkage by weight for example composition 4A is from 5% after 10 days to 37% after 60 days. The disclosure further indicates release percentage is varied through a given polyol:cross-linker ratio and correlation length of the network (par. 147: “For a given polyol:cross-linker ratio, the higher the correlation length of the network the faster the release of the perfume.”).
Considering Fernandez Prieto’s disclosure, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had the technical capabilities to try different range of ratio and correlation lengths to produce the gel product with the chosen release/shrinkage rate, including claimed shrinkage is from 3% to 30%, at the end of a time period of from 1 to 75 days. No inventive effort would have been required.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the teachings of Fernandez Prieto to utilize a cross-linked gel with shrinkage is from 3% to 30%, at the end of a time period of from 1 to 75 days (claim 2), or from 4% to 20%, at the end of a time period of from 1 to 75 days (claim 14). Doing so would provide for a more uniform and longer lasting product compared to faster release gel shown in example composition 4A, 4E, 4G (par. 146-147).
Regarding claim 3, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 1, Hart further discloses a gap (space at 10; see annotation) between the peripheral evaporative surface of the solid article (7) and the housing.
Hart does not explicitly teach, but shows in the proportions of solid article shown in figs. 3-4 that the gap is configured to enable shrinkage along a first dimension of the solid article at a faster rate relative to shrinkage along a second dimension of the solid article (since Hart’s gap extends the entire vertical dimension and therefore would allow faster shrinkage rate along vertical dimension relative to shrinkage along vertical dimension of the article since there is more shrinkage vertically; the end of paragraph 32 also suggests higher percentage in dimensional shrinkage in the direction of the movement of the device).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the gap is configured to enable shrinkage along a first dimension of the solid article at a faster rate relative to shrinkage along a second dimension of the solid article. Doing so would yield the predictable result of facilitating exposure/display of the intended visual cue (see first sentence of paragraph 32)
Regarding claim 4, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 3, further comprising an anchor (upward projection from end wall 2; see annotation above) arranged within the housing, wherein the solid article is releasably attached (by first detaching end wall 2; see end of par. 35) to the anchor to provide the gap.
Regarding claim 5, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 1, wherein the solid article (7) comprises a central evaporative surface (gel surface at 10) and the visual indicator (9) is disposed behind the central evaporative surface (see figs. 3-4).
Regarding claim 6, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 1, wherein the visual indicator (9) indicates a state of the dispenser selected from the group consisting of: an end of life of the dispenser (see fig. 4), a quantitative state indicative of a number of days use of the dispenser, and combinations thereof.
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 1, wherein the volatile composition is selected from the group consisting of: a perfume, a deodorizing agent, a sanitizing agent, an insect repellant, a malodor reduction agent (Hart, par. 31-32: “fragrance”), mixtures thereof, the volatile composition is present in a level of 3 wt. % to 85 wt. %, of the solid article (claim 7; see Hart, par. 31: “A gel-matrix of the present invention may contain from only 1 or 2% fragrance up to as much as ninety % or more”), or the volatile composition is present in a level of from 15 wt. % to 75 wt. % of the solid article (claim 17; see Hart, par. 31).
Alternatively, Fernandez Prieto discloses a comparable solid article (cross-linked gel composition) including a perfume volatile composition, wherein paragraph 68 discloses various weight percentage of the perfume can be anywhere from above 30 wt. % to 100 wt. %.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the additional teachings of Hart or Fernandez Prieto to utilize a cross-linked gel with the volatile composition is present in a level of 3 wt. % to 85 wt. %, of the solid article (claim 7), or the volatile composition is present in a level of from 15 wt. % to 75 wt. % of the solid article (claim 18) to facilitate the desired characteristic and intensity of the scented gel.
Regarding claim 9, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 1, wherein the solid article comprises a gel composition selected from the group consisting of: an ethyl cellulose polymer, a chemically cross-linked polyol or derivative thereof, and mixtures thereof (see claims 4-5 of Fernandez Prieto).
Regarding claim 10, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 9, wherein the solid article comprises a chemically cross-linked polyol, wherein the polyol or derivative thereof is selected from the group consisting of: polyol, polyester polyol, polyglycerol and mixtures thereof (see claims 4-5 of Fernandez Prieto).
Regarding claim 18, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 10, wherein the solid article comprises a polyol derivative comprising a polyester polyol (see claims 4-5 of Fernandez Prieto).
Regarding claim 12, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 4, wherein the anchor (upward protrusion on end wall 2) is comprised in an article holder (see annotation above).
Regarding claim 13, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 12, wherein the article holder comprises a center opening configured for receiving the solid article (opening defined by the upward protrusion of end wall 2).
Claim 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hart (US20040188535) in view of Fernandez Prieto (US 20190022265), further in view of Mikkelsen (US20130202788).
Regarding claim 8, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 1, but Hart and Fernandez Prieto are silent with regard to the solid article being non-aqueous, and comprises less than 1% by weight of water, although Fernandez Prieto discloses the non-aqueous gel is known via teaching of Mikkelsen.
Mikkelsen discloses a comparable fragrance gel that is non-aqueous and comprises less than 1% by weight of water (par. 58).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the teachings of Mikkelsen to utilize the solid article being non-aqueous, and comprises less than 1% by weight of water. Doing so would improve rigidity of the gel when free-standing gel structure is desired (abstract, par. 1).
Claims 11, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hart (US20040188535) in view of Fernandez Prieto (US 20190022265), further in view of MacQueen (US 6399713).
Regarding claim 11, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 1, wherein Hart does not teach at least a portion of the solid article is characterized by an optical property selected from the group consisting of: a Haze measurement of at least 40%, a Total Transmission Rate of less than 30%, and combinations thereof.
However, MacQueen discloses gels that can be used as air fresheners (col. 17, ln 11-12) wherein %haze value for a gel can be increased if desired by appropriate selection of solvent and gellant (col. 6, ln 29-31), and that it is a routine matter to optimize the amount of block copolymer is used in a composition depending on the desired consistency of the product (col. 17, ln 32-35).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the teachings of MacQueen to utilize at least a portion of the solid article is characterized by an optical property of a Haze measurement of at least 40%,. Doing so would provide for the desired consistency of the product to the user preference, as suggested by MacQueen.
Regarding claim 19, Hart discloses a solid article (7) for a volatile composition dispenser, the solid article comprising:
a volatile composition (gel composition of 7, same article shown in fig. 3 is labeled in fig. 1; par. 35-36), at least one central evaporative surface (see annotation), and a peripheral evaporative surface (see annotation) circumscribing the central evaporative surface (see annotated fig. 3),
wherein the solid article is capable of shrinkage relative to the peripheral evaporative surface from an initial size (fig. 3) to a reduced size (fig. 4) smaller than the initial size upon exposure of the solid article to the environment in an interior space (space where the gel and assembly is placed), wherein the solid article is characterized by a shrinkage in a direction (see fig. 4, inward shrinkage is away from the initial annotated peripheral evaporative surface) away from the peripheral evaporative surface
PNG
media_image2.png
586
653
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Hart does not teach the shrinkage from the peripheral evaporative surface is greater than 1% to less than 40%, and wherein the central evaporative surface is characterized by a central evaporative surface area of less than 150 cm2.
However, Fernandez Prieto discloses a comparable solid article (cross-linked gel composition) configured to have shrinkage in the order from 10%-30% by surface area (par. 16). The disclosed cross-linked gel exhibit more uniform release of the hydrophobic material. Paragraph 41 also discloses the shape and size of the gel composition can affect the release and longevity of the hydrophobic material and suitable gel compositions can have a surface area of less than 150 cm2, preferably from 3.0 to 100 cm2, more preferably from 6.0 to 60 cm2.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the teachings of Fernandez Prieto to substitute Hart’s gel with the cross-linked gel taught by Fernandez Prieto with shrinkage from the peripheral evaporative surface from 10%-30%, which is greater than 1% to less than 40%, and wherein the central evaporative surface is characterized by a central evaporative surface area of less than 150 cm2. Doing so would facilitate a more uniform release profile of the hydrophobic material (see paragraph 16).
Additionally, Hart does not teach at least a portion of the solid article is characterized by an optical property selected from the group consisting of: a Haze measurement of at least 40%, a Total Transmission Rate of less than 30%, and combinations thereof.
However, MacQueen discloses gels that can be used as air fresheners (col. 17, ln 11-12) wherein %haze value for a gel can be increased if desired by appropriate selection of solvent and gellant (col. 6, ln 29-31), and that it is a routine matter to optimize the amount of block copolymer is used in a composition depending on the desired consistency of the product (col. 17, ln 32-35).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the teachings of MacQueen to utilize at least a portion of the solid article is characterized by an optical property of a Haze measurement of at least 40%. Doing so would provide for the desired consistency of the product to the user preference, as suggested by MacQueen.
Claim 15, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hart (US20040188535) in view of Fernandez Prieto (US 20190022265), further in view of Kirkman (US 2251058)
Regarding claim 15, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 6, Hart further discloses visual cues indicative of the gel being exhausted and may also give a quantitative indication as to how many days use a gel matrix has remaining of useful operation (par. 11-12), but is silent regarding the visual indicator comprises a set of characters or graphical symbols indicative of the state of the dispenser.
Kirkman discloses a comparable chemical evaporator that includes the visual indicator comprises a set of characters or a graphical symbol (46, 83, 84, 92) indicative of the state of the dispenser (figs. 2, 5, 8, 9).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the teachings of Kirkman to provide the visual indicator comprises a set of characters or graphical symbols indicative of the state of the dispenser. Doing so would yield the predictable result of facilitating a clear message for prompt user replacement as shown in figures 2, 5, 8, 9.
Regarding claim 16, Hart, as modified above, discloses the dispenser according to claim 6, Hart further discloses visual cues indicative of the gel being exhausted and may also give a quantitative indication as to how many days use a gel matrix has remaining of useful operation (par. 11-12), but is silent regarding the visual indicator comprises a single word or a graphical symbol indicative of an end of life of the dispenser (see portion 46, fig. 2).
Kirkman discloses a comparable chemical evaporator that includes the visual indicator comprises a single word (“EMPTY”; “WARNING”) or a graphical symbol (46, 83, 84, 92) indicative of the state of the dispenser (figs. 2, 5, 8, 9).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hart to incorporate the teachings of Kirkman to provide the visual indicator comprises a set of characters or graphical symbols indicative of the state of the dispenser. Doing so would yield the predictable result of facilitating a clear message for prompt user replacement as shown in figures 2, 5, 8, 9.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-19 have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
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 TUONGMINH NGUYEN PHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-0158. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM M-F.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached at 571-270-1814. 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.
/TUONGMINH N PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights