DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 47-49 are withdrawn.
Claims 26-46 are pending and represent all claims currently under consideration.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claims 26-46 are considered to have an effective filing date of 02/08/2021.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 09/16/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the special technical feature requires the weight amount of the multi-tail surfactant A to be lower than the weight amount of the anionic surfactant D (Remarks, pages 2-3). This is not found persuasive because the method of Group II does not require an anionic surfactant D or for the weight amount of the multi-tail surfactant A to be lower than the weight amount of the anionic surfactant D. Therefore, the special technical feature shared by the two inventions is as previously stated, and does not make a contribution over the prior art.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 47-49 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 09/16/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 08/25/2023 has been considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 28 objected to because of the following informalities: “one alkyl chains” should read “one alkyl chain”. Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The use of the terms SoftCAT, Sasol, Shell, BASF, Exxon, Solvay, Octopirox, and Clariant, which are trade names or marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 26-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the weight amount". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation should read “a weight amount”.
Claims 27-46 are dependent on the rejected claim 26 and do not cure its deficiencies.
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.
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.
Claims 26-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kleinen (US 9320697 B2).
Regarding claim 26, Kleinen teaches a composition 20-67 parts by weight of at least one dialkyl sulfosuccinate (i.e., a multi-tail surfactant A as defined by the instant specification, page 3, lines 31-32) and 15-40 parts by weight of at least one anionic surfactant (i.e., an anionic surfactant D; Kleinen, claim 1), resulting in a relative weight amount of A to a weight amount of D which overlaps the relative weights of A being less than D as claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP §2144.05(I). Kleinen teaches the formulation can comprise active ingredients (i.e., an active ingredient C; Kleinen, column 2, line 47) and polymeric additives (Kleinen, column 2, line 59), with an example containing polyquaternium-10 (i.e., a cationic polymer B as defined by the instant specification, page 28, line 6; Kleinen column 27, example 40d).
Kleinen is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because both Kleinen and the instant invention are in the same field of surfactant personal care compositions. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arrived at the claimed invention based on the teachings of Kleinen under the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 103.
Regarding claim 27, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches formulations for cosmetic care and cleansing (i.e., personal care compositions; Kleinen, column 15, line 4).
Regarding claim 28, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches the composition comprises at least one dialkyl (i.e., two chains) sulfosuccinate (Kleinen, claim 1), wherein the alkyl radicals can be linear or branched with preferably 6-14 carbon atoms (Kleinen, column 4, lines 4-10).
Regarding claim 29, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation comprising 9% of diethylhexyl sodium sulfosuccinate (i.e., a multi-tail surfactant; Kleinen, column 26, example 37a), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 30, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. As above, Kleinen teaches the composition comprises at least one dialkyl sulfosuccinate (Kleinen, claim 1).
Regarding claim 31, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches the dialkyl sulfosuccinate can be dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate (Kleinen, column 4, line 20).
Regarding claim 32, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation example comprising hydroxypropyl guar hydroxypropyltrimonium chloride (Kleinen, column 24, example 235).
Regarding claim 33, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation example comprising hydroxypropyl guar hydroxypropyltrimonium chloride (i.e., a cationic polymer B as defined by the instant claim 32) in 0.1% by weight (Kleinen, column 24, example 235), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 34, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation example comprising octopirox (i.e., an active ingredient C as defined by the instant specification, page 32, line 3) in 0.1% by weight (Kleinen, column 31, example 44a), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 35, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation example comprising octopirox (i.e., an anti-microbial and anti-fungal agent as defined by the instant specification, page 32, line 3) in 0.1% by weight (Kleinen, column 31, example 44a), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 36, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation example comprising octopirox (i.e., piroctone olamine as defined by the instant specification, page 32, line 3) in 0.1% by weight (Kleinen, column 31, example 44a), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 37, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a composition comprising 15-40 parts by weight of at least one anionic surfactant (i.e., an anionic surfactant D; Kleinen, claim 1), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 38, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches anionic surfactants present in the composition are preferably alkyl sulfates (i.e., sulfated; Kleinen, column 6, lines 50-52).
Regarding claim 39, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation comprising sodium laureth sulfate in 10.7% by weight (Kleinen, column 22, example 183), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 40, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches the composition further comprises at least one amphoteric surfactant (Kleinen, claim 1).
Regarding claim 41, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches the composition comprises an amphoteric surfactant which can be cocamidopropyl betaine (Kleinen, column 5, line 26).
Regarding claim 42, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation comprising cocamidopropyl betaine (i.e., an amphoteric surfactant as defined by the instant claim 41) in 3% by weight (Kleinen, column 26, example 37a), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 43, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches a formulation comprising 0% of an oil (Kleinen, column 27, example 41g), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 44, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches the composition comprises a solvent such as water in preferably from 40-50% by weight (Kleinen, column 15, lines 53-56), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 45, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 26. Kleinen teaches the composition comprises a solvent such as propylene glycol (i.e., a polyhydric alcohol as defined by the instant specification, page 5, line 27; Kleinen, column 15, lines 51-52).
Regarding claim 46, Kleinen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as applied to claim 45. As above, Kleinen teaches the composition comprises a solvent such as propylene glycol (Kleinen, column 15, lines 51-52).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHASITY P JANOSKO whose telephone number is (703)756-5307. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-3:30 ET.
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, Brian-Yong Kwon can be reached at (571)272-0581. 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.
/C.P.J./Examiner, Art Unit 1613
/JENNIFER A BERRIOS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1613