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 .
This action is responsive to applicants’ amendment and response received January 6, 2026. Claims 1, 2, and 7-10 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The rejection of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8, and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Avella et al, US 2022/0185973 is withdrawn in view of applicants’ amendment and response.
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, 2, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taneja, US 9,034,912.
Taneja teaches a pharmaceutical formulation comprising 0.02% BHA antioxidant and glycol ether solvent (col. 5, formulations 1-6). Suitable glycol ethers of the invention include DPGME, and PGME, and a suitable antioxidant includes ascorbyl palmitate (col. 3, lines 15-31). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to prepare a pharmaceutical formulation with DPGME and ascorbyl palmitate as these are suitable components taught by the reference.
With respect to claims 8 and 9, as the only method step is “treating” a glycol ether with an antioxidant, the examiner maintains that any mixture of glycol ether and antioxidant satisfies this claim limitation. If applicants’ process inhibits the generation of peroxide in glycol ethers, why not any combination of glycol ether and antioxidant?
Applicants have traversed this rejection on the grounds the reference focuses on a different field and objective from the claimed invention, and this is true. Applicants have claimed a composition comprising two components, a well-known glycol ether and a well-known antioxidant. Should such a composition be allowed, applicants could use it for any purpose, not merely inhibiting peroxide formation in glycol ether solvents. Any reference that contemplates these two components, whatever it is used for, will reject the claims at hand.
Claims 1, 2, and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dubs et al, US 12,209,230.
Dubs teaches a cleaning composition comprising 99.9% glycol ether solvent mixture, including DPGME, and 0.1% antioxidant (col. 7, sample 2). Suitable antioxidants include ascorbic acid esters (claim 8). The examiner maintains that any teaching of ascorbic acid esters immediately calls to mind very common ascorbic acid esters such as ascorbyl palmitate, and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to prepare sample 2 above with ascorbyl palmitate with confidence of forming an effective cleaning composition.
With respect to claims 8 and 9, as the only method step is “treating” a glycol ether with an antioxidant, the examiner maintains that any mixture of glycol ether and antioxidant satisfies this claim limitation. If applicants’ process inhibits the generation of peroxide in glycol ethers, why not any combination of glycol ether and antioxidant?
Applicants have traversed this rejection for the same reason set forth above and the examiner’s response is the same.
Claims 1, 2, and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hernandez, US 2021/0401682.
Hernandez teaches a topical vitamin C composition wherein the vitamin C may be an ascorbic acid derivative, such as ascorbyl palmitate (¶36) present in an amount as little as 0.1% (¶37) and suitable solvents include DPBE, PGPE, and DPGDME (¶55) that may be present in amounts as high as 95% (¶57). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to prepare a topical composition comprising glycol ether and ascorbyl palmitate with confidence of forming an effective topical composition as these components are taught as suitable or preferred by the reference.
With respect to claims 8 and 9, as the only method step is “treating” a glycol ether with an antioxidant, the examiner maintains that any mixture of glycol ether and antioxidant satisfies this claim limitation. If applicants’ process inhibits the generation of peroxide in glycol ethers, why not any combination of glycol ether and antioxidant?
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES I BOYER whose telephone number is (571)272-1311. The examiner can normally be reached M-S 10-430.
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 5712722817. 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.
/CHARLES I BOYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761