Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1-14-2026 has been entered.
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 .
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 nonobviousness.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barnabas et al. (WO 00 24856) in view of Paullin (WO 2016/160738 A2; same as CA 2975289 A1) is withdrawn.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burgess et al (2017/0335245) in view of Barnabas et al (WO0024856).
Burgess et al teach a fabric care composition comprising 20% of a surfactant system containing alkylbenzene sulfonate, ethoxylated alcohol, alkyl ether sulfate, and the balance water (169, example 1). Preferred cationic polymers suitable for use in these fabric care compositions include polyquaternium-67 ([39) which comprises the same characteristics of the claimed cat polymer(s) and are present in amounts as high as 2.5% (26). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use well-known and commercially available polymers and silicones in the laundry detergent above with confidence of forming an effective fabric treatment composition as these components are taught by the reference as suitable additives for their detergent, comprising surfactants. See example 1 for specific surfactants, perfumes and adjuncts.
PNG
media_image1.png
303
364
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 3, Burgess et al lacks a specific teaching of perfumes but does suggest a broader view of chemical dictionary and perfume guides. Barnabas teaches a fabric care composition (abstract, pages 1-2) comprising; water; [examples X-XV], cleaning surfactants; [page 2: D, page 3], deposition aid polymer (instant claim 2) such as dextran; [page 4: J. 2, page 9: F. 3, pages 10: L. 2, 4], and fragrances such as citronellol and linalool (pages 135-136).
Regarding claims 10-12, Barnabas teaches a method of cleaning/treating fabrics (i.e. laundry) which includes applying the detergent composition on laundry material in a water diluted medium by soaking, spraying etc. wherein the fabric softening silicon agent would naturally be associated with article(s) of laundry; [page 5, 4. 3].
It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan to include the specific perfumes to said fabric for fragrance deposition with the same or similar cationic polymer for deposition aid. One skilled in the art, in the absence of a showing to the contrary, would have been motivated to include the specific perfume for their intended purpose.
[W]hen a patent 'simply arranges old elements with each performing the same function it had been known to perform' and yields no more than one would expect from such an arrangement, the combination is obvious. [KSR Int'l Co. v.Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. at 418 (quoting Sakraida v. Ag Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273,282 (1976).]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NECHOLUS OGDEN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-1322. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 EST 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-1498. 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.
/NECHOLUS OGDEN JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761