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 arguments filed 11/06/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that Crawford does not teach that the molded components formed from the copolyester composition which comprise the conduit and the container comprising a terpene oil composition are in fluid communication with each other.
This argument has been considered but is moot in view of the new grounds of rejection below.
The Applicant also argues that presently claimed invention shows unexpected results for the article formed from the copolyester composition. Specifically that the examples show a high resistance to terpene oils.
Examples 1-A, and 1-B in the specification are not commensurate in scope with the claims. Specifically, the claims teach 2 specific blends of polymers Ex 1-A base copolyester had diacid residues of about 97.8 mole% TPA and 2.2 mole% IPA, and glycol residues of about 98.8 mole% CHDM and 11.2 mole% of TMCD. Ex 1-A had a Tg of about
102C, a Tm of 253 to 259C and a crystallization half time of about 1 minute at
175C. Ex1-B is the same polyester where the inherent viscosity is 0.92 dl/g (Ex 1-B). These examples are not commensurate full scope of the claimed range with 70-100% moles of terephthalic acid residues, 5-15 mol% TMCD, and 85-95 mol% CHDM or the full scope of the any of the claimed properties.
Whether unexpected results are the result of unexpectedly improved results or a property not taught by the prior art, the objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support. In other words, the showing of unexpected results must be reviewed to see if the results occur over the entire claimed range. See MPEP 716.02(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Crawford 20060287496A1 in view of The Business of Perfume: Demographics, Gender, and Influence (Retrieved from: <https://takeonethingoff.com/blog/2018/05/23/the-business-of-perfume-demographics-gender-and-influence/#_ftn10> on: 6/25/2025, May 2018), Fragrances, vitamins and hormones - the ABC of terpenes, (Beauty Forum 2010 (3), 56-58), Guzman, D. (What Are the Differences Between Perfume and Parfum? Retrieved from: < https://www.edensgarden.com/blogs/news/what-are-the-differences-between-perfume-and-parfum?srsltid=AfmBOopgpKcyxWrq3v0OKat7JVo-j6cPF8B9uqS-mcBsgpnauiPU8cyI> on: 6/25/2025, June 2019), Saint Clair (Genius In A Bottle: The Best Of Perfume Bottle Design By The Decade, Retrieved from: < https://www.beautylish.com/a/vxymq/perfume-bottle-design-history> on 6/25/2025, May 2013), and Stefanelli US 20110043364.
Regarding claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-16, Crawford teaches a polyester composition (Abstract). Crawford teaches the composition can have an intrinsic viscosity as determined in 60/40 (wt/wt) phenol/tetrachloroethane at a concentration of 0.5 g/100ml at 25°C of greater than 0.76 dL/g to 0.95 dL/g (Paragraph [0107]). This reads on the claimed intrinsic viscosity. Crawford also teaches the composition can have a glass transition temperature of 100 to 115C (Paragraph [0099]). This reads on the claimed glass transition temperature. Crawford also teaches the glycol component of the composition can comprise 0.01 to 10 mol% 2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-1,3-cyclobutanediol residues (Paragraph [0103]). This overlaps with the claimed range of 9-13% 2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-1,3-cyclobutanediol. Crawford also teaches that the remainder of the glycol component can include, to any amount 1,4-cyclohexanedimethanol (Paragraph [0104]). This corresponds to a percentage of 90-99.9% CHDM residues. This overlaps with the claimed range of 87-91 mol% CHDM. Crawford does not teach that the glycol component must comprise ethylene glycol notable by the wording “or ethylene glycol” (Paragraph [0104]). It would have been obvious to not choose ethylene glycol as the glycol component as this is shown by Crawford as being a suitable embodiment of this polyester. This reads on the claimed “wherein ethylene glycol is excluded as the glycol component.”
Crawford also teaches that the dicarboxylic component of the composition can comprise 95-100mol% terephthalic acid residues (Paragraph [0110]). This reads on the claimed range of 95-100mol%.
Crawford teaches the composition can be used to form containers for cosmetics or personal care applications (Paragraph [0174]). Crawford is silent on the composition being configured to receive a terpene oil composition.
The perfume and fragrance manufacturing industry in the US represents about 12% of the cosmetics industry since 2011 and as of the end of 2016, the global fragrance market was worth $46.73 billion and growing (The Business of Perfume: Demographics, Gender, and Influence, Page 2, Page 4). Because perfumes and fragrances make up a significant portion of the cosmetics industry and that market is growing, it would have been obvious to form a product that can be used as a perfume or fragrance to enhance commercial opportunities.
Terpenes are well known in the art to be common in perfumes due to their strong pleasant smells (Fragrances, vitamins and hormones - the ABC of terpenes, Page 1). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that the article used to form a perfume dispenser would be exposed to terpenes. Perfumes have a concentration of from about 5-20% fragrant essential oils (Guzman, Page 2 and Page 3). This reads on the claimed range of 1% or more of terpenes. Since 1907, a spray top perfume bottle is a popular way to apply perfume (Saint Clair, Page 2). This dispenses vapors. It would have been obvious for the bottle of perfume to comprise a spray top as this method of housing and dispensing fragrances is well known in the art and shows a suitable shape for a perfume container/dispenser. The vapors when dispensed touch both the surface of the bottle and the inner container as a pre vapor formulation prior to being dispensed. This reads on the limitations of vapor or prevapor formulation in contact with the surface of the article.
Stefanelli teaches an article comprising a conduit and container in fluid communication specifically used in applications for perfume (Abstract, Figure 1). Stefanelli also teaches the container comprises a spray top (Paragraph [0024]). It would have been obvious for the spray top perfume bottle of Saint Clair to have the structure of Figure 1 of Stefanelli as this shows a suitable structure of a spray top bottle used specifically for perfume. This represents the use of a suitable spray top bottle used in the same application. "The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416-21 (2007). See MPEP 2141.
Regarding claim 14, Crawford also teaches that the dicarboxylic component of the composition can comprise 95-100mol% terephthalic acid residues (Paragraph [0110]). This reads on the claimed range of 97.1-98.5mol%. Crawford also teaches the dicarboxylic acid component of the polyester comprises 0.01-30% isophthalic acid. This overlaps with the claimed range of 1.5-2.9% isophthalic acid.
Crawford also teaches the glycol component of the composition can comprise 0.01 to 10 mol% 2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-1,3-cyclobutanediol residues (Paragraph [0103]). This overlaps with the claimed range of 10-12%. 2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-1,3-cyclobutanediol. Crawford also teaches that the remainder of the glycol component can include, to any amount 1,4-cyclohexanedimethanol (Paragraph [0104]). This corresponds to a percentage of 90-99.9% CHDM residues. This overlaps with the claimed range of 88-90 mol% CHDM.
Regarding claim 7, Crawford teaches the crystallization half time can be 1.5 minutes or less (Paragraph [0120]). This falls within the claimed range of 30 seconds to 5 minutes.
Regarding claim 17, Crawford teaches the method of making the articles formed from the composition can be injection blow molding (Paragraph [0167]). This reads on the claimed “injection blow molded articles.”
Regarding claims 18-19, Crawford does not expressly disclose the reverse-side impact strength of the article formed from the composition after exposure to terpenes. Nevertheless, products of identical chemical compositions cannot have mutually exclusive properties. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, a prima facie case of obviousness has been established. See MPEP 2112.01. Therefore, Crawford’s composition and resulting article as described above will therefore necessarily possess the claimed reverse-side impact strength.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Crawford 20060287496A1 in view of The Business of Perfume: Demographics, Gender, and Influence (Retrieved from: <https://takeonethingoff.com/blog/2018/05/23/the-business-of-perfume-demographics-gender-and-influence/#_ftn10> on: 6/25/2025, May 2018), Fragrances, vitamins and hormones - the ABC of terpenes, (Beauty Forum 2010 (3), 56-58), Guzman, D. (What Are the Differences Between Perfume and Parfum? Retrieved from: <https://www.edensgarden.com/blogs/news/what-are-the-differences-between-perfume-and-parfum?srsltid=AfmBOopgpKcyxWrq3v0OKat7JVo-j6cPF8B9uqS-mcBsgpnauiPU8cyI> on: 6/25/2025, June 2019), and Saint Clair (Genius In A Bottle: The Best Of Perfume Bottle Design By The Decade, Retrieved from: < https://www.beautylish.com/a/vxymq/perfume-bottle-design-history> on 6/25/2025, May 2013), and Stefanelli US 20110043364 in further view of Polyester (PES)(C7H2 Br3O3) Plastic Recycling (Retrieved from: <https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=7978> or 6/25/2025, December 2012).
Regarding claim 20, Crawford is silent on the composition comprising at least 50 mol% recycled content. However, it would be an advantageous to use recycled carboxylic acid content for the advantage of saving on cost and environmental benefits (Azomaterials, Page 1). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the composition of Crawford to comprise recycled content. 100% recycled content. This reads on the limitations of claim 20.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 LILY K. SLOAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7733. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5 PM Pacific.
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 Jones can be reached at (571)270-7733. 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.
/LILY K SLOAN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1762
/ROBERT S JONES JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1762