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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 8/12/2026 has been considered but does not place the application in condition for allowance. The rejection is maintained as noted below with corrections for the citations regarding claims 21-23, 31 and 32..
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.
Claim(s) 16-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 106591013 in view of WO 2015/028567.
Regarding claim 16, CN ‘013 teaches a solid detergent (see for example 0105) which comprises a biological surfactant (0042-0046) and can contain enzymes (0048). CN ‘103 differs from the present invention in not specifying the use of an enzyme particle with a solid core and a coating which are essentially free of titanium dioxide. WO ‘567 teaches a detergent composition which comprises solid enzyme particles which comprise a solid core and a coating. WO ‘567 teaches that the particles are specifically formulated to avoid the use of titanium dioxide. Page 10, lines 8-10 indicates that titanium dioxide can be replaced by a fluorescent whitening agent. WO ‘567 teaches that coating the enzyme improves storage stability and reduces dust formation during handling (page 5, lines 14-15). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the coated particles of WO ‘567 as the enzyme component of CN ‘013, since such would give the advantage of improved storage stability and reduced dust formation. Furthermore, it would be obvious that using a coating would improve the ability to release the enzyme in a controlled manner during use as a detergent.
Regarding claims 17 -20, CN ‘013 teaches the use sophorolipids, rhamnolipids and mannosylerythritol lipids (0042-0046). These comprise surfactants derived from a biological component, and comprise non-ionic surfactants.
Regarding claims 21-23, CN ‘013 teaches that the surfactant may be present at a level of 1-20% (0042-0043), thus overlapping and rendering obvious the claimed ranges (see MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 24, neither CN ‘013 or WO ‘567 indicate that alkylbenzene sulfonates must be present in the detergent.
Regarding claim 25-26, WO ,567 teaches that builders and co-builders such as EDTA may be added to the detergent composition (page 16, line 31 – page 17, line 1). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a co-builder such as EDTA to remove unwanted ions, such as calcium or magnesium ions. With regard to claim 26, WO ‘567 teaches that the co-builder may be present at a level up to 50%.
Regarding claim 27, although the amount of enzyme particles used by WO ‘567 is not specifically disclosed, the variation of the amount of particles in the detergent to achieve successful cleaning would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 28, WO ‘567 teaches that the enzyme particles may comprise 0.5 – 50% of enzyme protein, thus overlapping and rendering obvious the claimed range (Page 7, lines 11-15).
Regarding claim 29, CN ‘013 teaches enzymes within those claimed (0048).
Regarding claim 30, CN ‘013 in paragraph 0119 teaches using a mixture including protease and other enzymes (see also 0048-0050).
Regarding claim 31, WO ‘567 teaches that the core comprises the enzyme (page 3, line 9).
Regarding claim 32, WO ‘567 teaches that the coating can be a salt or polymer coating (page 5, lines 14-19).
Regarding claim 33, as noted for claim 16, the composition is rendered obvious over CN ‘103 in view of WO ‘567, such would obviously have the same storage stability as the current claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In arguments D and E, applicant attacks the references individually, however as noted in MPEP2145 IV, attacking references individually cannot be used to show non-obviouness.
Applicant further argued that there was no reason to consult the references for a problem that neither reference recognizes. However, WO ‘567 clearly indicates that utilizing the coated improves storage stability, thus clearly addressing a recognized problem.
Applicant has argued that the current invention has a property of improving biosurfactant stability. WO ‘567 clearly teaches why one of ordinary skill would use encapsulated enzyme particles to improve storage stability, dust reduction and visual appearance which clearly render their use obvious to one of ordinary skill, for these advantages. It has clearly been held that using a different rationale for combining references does not make the combination non-obvious (MPEP 2144 IV).
Furthermore both WO ‘567 and the current invention (see claim 33) are concerned with the issue of storage stability. It is further noted that applicant has provided a document “journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology” A: Chemistry 209 (2010) pages 147-152 which indicates that it was known that titanium dioxide can degrade biosurfactants.
The rejection is thus maintained.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP C TUCKER whose telephone number is (571)272-1095. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30.
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, Alexa Neckel can be reached at 571-272-2450. 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.
/PHILIP C TUCKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1745
Prosecution Insights