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 .
Summary
Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action. All pending claims are under examination in this application.
Priority
The current application was filed on March 6, 2023. The current application claims domestic priority to provisional patent application 63/323,379 filed March 24, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
Receipt of the Information Disclosure Statement filed on June 2, 2023 is acknowledged. A signed copy of the document is attached to this office action.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10 and 19 have three acronyms that have not been defined in full. Please include the full text for each acronym.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheuing et al. (US8,637,088B2) in view of Cornmell et al. (US2014/0350121A1) and Romano et al. (EP0791362A2).
[The Examiner is going to introduce each new reference and then combine them where appropriate to reject the instant claims.]
1. Schueing et al.
Schueing et al. is considered the closest prior art to the present invention as it teaches natural silver disinfectant compositions (see title). Furthermore, Scheuing et al. disclose an antimicrobial composition that contains a soluble silver salt and an alkanolamine or aminoalcohol. The composition may additionally contain an amino acid or amino acid salt and surfactant. The composition has additional stability and activity compared to prior art silver complexes (see abstract).
2. Cornmell et al.
Cornmell et al. teach antimicrobial compositions (see title). In addition, Cornmell et al. disclose that the present invention relates to an antimicrobial composition and a method for disinfection involving the antimicrobial composition. It particularly relates to an antimicrobial composition for personal cleaning, oral care or hard surface cleaning applications. It was found that compositions comprising one or more monosubstituted phenols, terpineol and a carrier provide synergistic antimicrobial action. In a preferred aspect the composition also comprises 1 to 80%-wt of one or more surfactants (see abstract).
3. Romano et al.
Romano et al. teach disinfecting compositions and processes for disinfecting surfaces (see title). Additionally, Romano et al. disclose that the present invention relates to a disinfecting composition comprising a peroxygen bleach, from 0.003% to 5% by weight of the total composition of a cyclic terpene or a derivative thereof and from 0.003% to 5% by weight of the total composition of a phenolic compound, as defined herein. In another embodiment the present invention relates to a disinfecting composition comprising from 0.003% to 5% by weight of the total composition of a cyclic terpene or a derivative thereof and from 0.003% to 5% by weight of the total composition of eugenol, carvacrol and/or ferulic acid, said composition being free of a peroxygen bleach. The present invention also encompasses a process of disinfecting an inanimate surface wherein a composition with or without a peroxygen bleach, and comprising from 0.003% to 5% by weight of a cyclic terpene or a derivative thereof, and from 0.003% to 5% by weight of a phenolic compound, as defined herein, is applied onto said surface (see abstract).
Combination of Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al.
Regarding instant claim 1, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach a carvacol cleaning composition. The necessary citations of Cornmell et al., Scheuing et al., and Romano et al. that pertain to instant claim 1 are presented in Table I.
Table I
Instant Claim 1
Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. Citations
A cleaning composition comprising:
Scheuing et al. disclose a disinfectant (antimicrobial) composition (see title and abstract within Scheuing et al.).
Cornmell et al. disclose an antimicrobial composition for personal cleaning or hard surface cleaning applications (see abstract within Cornmell et al.).
(a) 0.1% to 2.0% by weight of carvacrol; (b) 0.5% to 5.0% by weight of one or more anionic surfactants; (c) 0.1% to 1.0% by weight of a buffer; (d) 85% to 99% water;
Cornmell et al. disclose an antimicrobial composition comprising: (a) 0.001 to 5% by weight a monosubstituted phenol (see paragraph [0058] within Cornmell et al.); (b) 2-15% by weight (see paragraph [0109] within Cornmell et al.) of one or more surfactants are that are anionic (see paragraph [0102] within Cornmell et al.); (d) 0.1 to 99% by weight water (see paragraph [0089] within Cornmell et al.).
Carvacrol is a disubstitued phenol (see Figure 1) and is not disclosed by Cornmell et al.
Figure 1
PNG
media_image1.png
156
156
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Romano et al. disclose this active ingredient. Romano et al. disclose use of the disubstituted phenol carvacrol at 0.003 to 5% by weight (see abstract within Romano et al.).
Scheuing et al. also disclose the use of carvacrol (see column 8, line 57) within their disinfectant composition.
Cornmell et al. does not disclose addition of a buffer. But Scheuing et al. does. Scheuing et al. disclose the use of builders or buffers at a level of 0.5 to 10% by weight (see columns 9-10, lines C. 9 ln 20-67 and C.10 ln 1-2 within Scheuing et al.).
(e) optionally, one or more adjuncts selected from the group consisting of: pH adjusters, solvents, sequestrants or chelating agents, fragrances or perfumes, dyes and/or colorants, builders, defoamers, thickeners, hydrotropes, antimicrobial compounds, preservatives, solubilizing materials, stabilizers, lotions and/or mineral oils, enzymes, cloud point modifiers, and any combinations or mixtures thereof;
Scheuing et al. disclose the use of builders (buffers), chelating agents (see column 9, left column within Scheuing et al.), natural thickeners (see column 10, right column within Scheuing et al.), dyes, and colorants (see column 11, left column within Scheuing et al.).
wherein the cleaning composition has a pH of 9-12 and the cleaning composition exhibits at least a 3-log reduction in a Staphylococcus aureus population within 10 minutes on a target surface.
Cornmell et al. disclose an antimicrobial cleaning compositions with a pH = 10 (see Table 25 within Cornmell et al.)
Scheuing et al. disclose the pH of their cleaning composition is from 9-11 (see column 10, line 58 within Scheuing et al.).
Cornmell et al. disclose that therefore, the
invention preferably relates to a method…wherein the surface disinfection time T2 of said method is less than 60 seconds, preferably less than 15
seconds, wherein T2 is defined as the time starting from the moment of applying the composition to the surface to be disinfected after which the number of microbes per unit area
is reduced by a factor of 10000 (i.e. a 4 log reduction)…” (see paragraph [0167] within Cornmell et al.).
Therefore, a skilled artisan (POSITA; person of ordinary skill in the art) would consult the disclosures of Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. to teach all the elements of instant claim 1.
The remainder of the instant claims which are either directly dependent on claim 1 are taught in full by the combination of Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al.
Regarding instant claims 2 and 7, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the anionic surfactant comprises at least one C8 – C12 alkyl sulfate. Cornmell et al. disclose that the anionic surfactant is preferably an alkali metal alkyl sulphate, more preferably a sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS). Mixtures of anionic surfactants may also be employed (see paragraph [0109] within Cornmell et al.). SLS is a C12 alkyl sulfate (see PTO-892 NPL U).
Regarding instant claims 3, 9, and 18, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the buffer comprises at least one of a carbonate, a silicate, or a citrate. Scheuing et al. disclose that the builder (buffer) can be selected from inorganic builders, such as alkali metal carbonate, alkali metal bicarbonate, alkali metal hydroxide, alkali metal silicate and combinations thereof (see column 9, lines 25-27 within Scheuing et al.).
Regarding instant claim 4, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the composition has a pH of about 10.5-12. Scheuing et al. disclose the pH of their cleaning composition is from 9-11 (see column 10, line 58 within Scheuing et al.).
Regarding instant claim 5, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the composition is loaded onto a substrate. Scheuing et al. disclose the cleaning composition may be part of a cleaning substrate. A wide variety of materials can be used as the cleaning substrate. The substrate should have sufficient wet strength, abrasivity, loft and porosity. Examples of suitable substrates include, nonwoven substrates, wovens substrates, hydroentangled substrates, foams and sponges and similar materials which can be used alone or attached to a cleaning implement… (see column 11, lines 37-44 within Scheuing et al.).
Regarding instant claim 6, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach a cleaning composition comprising: (a) 0.1% to 2.0% by weight of carvacrol; (b) 0.1% to 3.0% by weight of a first anionic surfactant; (c) 0.1% to 3.0% by weight of a second anionic surfactant; (d) 85% to 99% water; (e) optionally, one or more adjuncts selected from the group consisting of: pH adjusters or buffers, solvents, sequestrants or chelating agents, fragrances or perfumes, dyes and/or colorants, builders, defoamers, thickeners, hydrotropes, antimicrobial compounds, preservatives, solubilizing materials, stabilizers, lotions and/or mineral oils, enzymes, or cloud point modifiers, and any combinations or mixtures thereof; wherein the cleaning composition has a pH of 9-12 and the cleaning composition exhibits at least a 3-log reduction in Staphylococcus aureus population within 10 minutes on a target surface. Please see the discussion and citations within instant claims 1, 2, 7, 8, and 16 for the necessary rejection text.
Regarding instant claims 8 and 16, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the second anionic surfactant comprises a C8 – C12 alkyl sulfate, having a different chain length than the first anionic surfactant. Please see the discussion and citations within instant claims 2 and 7 for the necessary rejection text. Cornmell et al. disclose when the product for hard surface cleaning applications is in the solid form, surfactants are preferably selected from primary alkyl sulphates…the composition may further comprise an anionic surfactant, such as alkyl ether sulphate preferably those having between 1 and 3 ethylene oxide groups, either from natural or synthetic source and/or sulphonic acid… especially preferred are sodium lauryl ether sulphates. Alkyl polyglucoside may also be present in the composition, preferably those having a carbon chain length between C6 and C16 (see paragraph [0108] within Cornmell et al.).
Regarding instant claims 10 and 19, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the composition further comprises a chelating agent, the chelating agent comprising a salt of at least one of an aminocarboxylate, MGDA, GLDA, EDTA, citrate or glucaric acid. Scheuing et al. disclose suitable amino carboxylates chelating agents include ethanol-diglycines, disodium cocoyl glutamatic acid, and methyl glycine di-acetic acid (MGDA), both in their acid form, or in their alkali metal, ammonium, and substituted ammonium salt forms. Further carboxylate chelating agents for use herein include salicylic acid, aspartic acid, glutamic acid, glycine, malonic acid or mixtures and derivatives thereof (see column 9, lines 58-64 within Scheuing et al.).
Regarding instant claims 11 through 14, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the cleaning composition exhibits at least a 3-log reduction in a microbial population within 10 minutes on a target surface. Cornmell et al. disclose that therefore, the invention preferably relates to a method…wherein the surface disinfection time T2 of said method is less than 60 seconds, preferably less than 15 seconds, wherein T2 is defined as the time starting from the moment of applying the composition to the surface to be disinfected after which the number of microbes per unit area s reduced by a factor of 10000 (i.e. a 4 log reduction)…” (see paragraph [0167] within Cornmell et al.).
Regarding instant claim 15, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach a cleaning composition comprising: (a) 0.1% to 2.0% by weight of an antimicrobial having the following structure:(b) 0.1% to 3.0% by weight of a first anionic surfactant; (c) 0.1% to 3.0% by weight of a second anionic surfactant; (d) 85% to 99% water; (e) optionally, one or more adjuncts selected from the group consisting of: pH adjusters or buffers, solvents, sequestrants or chelating agents, fragrances or perfumes, dyes and/or colorants, builders, defoamers, thickeners, hydrotropes, antimicrobial compounds, preservatives, solubilizing materials, stabilizers, lotions and/or mineral oils, enzymes, or cloud point modifiers, and any combinations or mixtures thereof; wherein the antimicrobial is a liquid at 20-25°C. Please see the discussion and citations within instant claims 1, 2, 7, 8, and 16 for the necessary rejection text. Furthermore, Cornmell et al. disclose wherein the composition is preferably a liquid composition (see paragraph [0164] within Cornmell et al.).
Regarding instant claim 17, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the composition is void of amine oxide, alcohol ethoxylate, and alkylpolyglycoside surfactants. Using the surfactants disclosed by Cornmell et al. (see paragraphs [0108-0109] within Cornmell et al.), a skilled artisan (POSITA) could meet the instant claim 17 claim limitations under routine experimentation and not select the identified components.
Regarding instant claim 20, Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. teach wherein the composition is substantially free of thymol. Scheuing et al. disclose actives of essential oils to be used herein include, but are not limited to, thymol (present for example in thyme), eugenol (present for example in cinnamon and clove), menthol (present for example in mint), geraniol (present for example in geranium and rose), verbenone (present for example in vervain), eucalyptol and pinocarvone (present in eucalyptus), cedrol (present for example in cedar), anethol (present for example in anise), carvacrol, hinokitiol, berberine, ferulic acid, cinnamic acid, methyl salycilic acid, methyl salycilate, terpineol and mixtures thereof. Preferred actives of essential oils to be used herein are thymol, eugenol, verbenone, eucalyptol, terpineol, cinnamic acid, methyl salycilic acid, and/or geraniol.
Other essential oils include Anethole 20/21 natural, Aniseed oil china star, Aniseed oil globe brand, Balsam (Peru), Basil oil (India), Black pepper oil, Black pepper oleoresin 40/20, Bois de Rose (Brazil) FOB, Borneol Flakes (China), Camphor oil, Camphor powder synthetic technical, Canaga oil (Java), Cardamom oil, Cassia oil (China), Cedarwood oil (China) BP, Cinnamon bark oil, Cinnamon leaf oil, Citronella
oil, Clove bud oil, Clove leaf, Coriander (Russia), Coumarin (China), Cyclamen Aldehyde, Diphenyl oxide, Ethyl vanilin, Eucalyptol, Eucalyptus oil, Eucalyptus citriodora, Fennel oil, Geranium oil, Ginger oil, Ginger oleoresin (India), White
grapefruit oil, Guaiacwood oil, Gurjun balsam, Heliotropin, Isobomyl acetate, Isolongifolene, Juniper berry oil, L-methyl acetate, Lavender oil, Lemon oil, Lemongrass oil, Lime oil distilled, Litsea Cubeba oil, Longifolene, Menthol crystals, Methyl cedryl ketone, Methyl chavicol, Methyl salicylate, Musk ambrette, Musk ketone, Musk xylol, Nutmeg oil, hol, Pimento berry oil, Pimento leaf oil, Rosalin, Sandalwood oil, Sandenol, Sage oil, Clary sage, Sassafras oil, Spearmint oil, Spike lavender, Tagetes, Tea tree oil, Vanilin, Vetyver oil (Java), and Wintergreen. Each of these botanical oils is commercially available (see columns 8-9, lines C.8, ln 50-67 and C.9, ln 1-19 within Scheuing et al.). Therefore, a skilled artisan (POSITA) could meet the instant claim 20 claim limitations under routine experimentation and select essential oils not containing thymol.
Analogous Art
The Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. references are directed to the same field of endeavor as the instant claims, that is, a cleaning composition, comprising carvacrol as disclosed within instant claim 1.
Obviousness Analysis
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disinfectant composition disclosed by Scheuing et al., using the teachings of Cornmell et al. and Romano et al., in order to arrive at the subject matter of the instant claims.
The Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. references all have considerable overlap for cleaning solutions. In this instance, Scheuing et al. supplies the overall preparation of a carvacrol cleaning solution, Cornmell et al. supplies the anionic surfactants, while Romano et al. supports the use of carvacrol within their antimicrobial composition. All references are directed to cleaning solutions and therefore constitute analogous art under MPEP §2141.01(a). A POSITA would have reasonably consulted the three references when seeking to develop a carvacrol cleaning composition.
Starting with Scheuing et al., the skilled person only had to try the necessary claim limitations disclosed by Cornmell et al. and Romano et al. The combination of Scheuing et al., Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. would allow one to arrive at the present application without employing inventive skill. This combination of the disinfectant composition taught by Scheuing et al. along with the use of the necessary claim limitations taught by Cornmell et al. and Romano et al. would allow a research and development scientist (POSITA) to develop the invention taught in the instant application. It would have only required routine experimentation to modify the disinfectant composition disclosed by Scheuing et al. with the use of the necessary claim limitations taught by Cornmell et al. and Romano et al. Incorporating the disclosure of Scheuing et al. into the cleaning compositions taught by Cornmell et al. and Romano et al. represents a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions, consistent with MPEP §2143 and KSR.
Furthermore, the additional claim limitations taught by Cornmell et al. and Romano et al. would have been viewed by a POSITA as routine design optimizations or known modifications for cleaning compositions. Implementing these features in Scheuing et al.’s disinfectant composition would not require more than ordinary skill or routine experimentation.
Accordingly, the combination of Scheuing et al., supplemented by Cornmell et al., and Romano et al. provides all the elements of the claimed invention. The resulting cleaning composition constitutes no more than the predictable outcome of combining familiar prior art components, and therefore the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN W LIPPERT III whose telephone number is (571)270-0862. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Robert A Wax can be reached on 571-272-0623. 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.
/JOHN W LIPPERT III/Examiner, Art Unit 1615 /Robert A Wax/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1615