DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-13 are presented for examination, wherein claims 6-13 are withdrawn.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on May 5, 2026 is acknowledged.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldstein et al (US 2017/0071865).
Regarding independent claim 1, Goldstein teaches a lotion that may be a liquid preparation that is an aqueous dispersion in which solid particles are present in a water base, wherein said lotion may comprise:
(i) a suspending agent to produce better dispersions, said suspending agent may be sodium carboxymethyl-cellulose, and the like (e.g. ¶0265);
(ii) an active agent, which may be metal oxides, such as iron oxides or titanium dioxide (e.g. ¶¶ 0149-150, 172, and 175-176);
(iii) an additional active agent, such as an anti-dandruff agent, which may be piroctone olamine, ciclopirox olamine, and mixtures thereof (e.g. ¶¶ 0178 and 190),
said aqueous dispersion reading on “…slurry,” wherein the preamble limitations “negative electrode…” and “for a lithium ion secondary battery” are severably interpreted as merely intended use, see also e.g. MPEP § 2111.02; and/or, said aqueous dispersion is composed of substantially identical compositions (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0004, 19-20, 28, 34, and 38), see also e.g. MPEP 2112.01, severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of said dispersion reads on the claimed properties, said aqueous dispersion comprising:
(1) said active agent, which may be metal oxide, such as iron oxides or titanium dioxide (e.g. supra), wherein said metal oxide, such as iron oxides or titanium dioxide are substantially identical compositions to that of the instant invention (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0019-20, further noting that titanium dioxide is a well-known negative electrode active material), see also e.g. MPEP 2112.01, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness said metal oxide, iron oxides and/or titanium dioxide reads on the claimed property, “negative electrode active material,” reading on “a negative electrode active material;”
(2) said suspending agent to produce better dispersions, said suspending agent may be sodium carboxymethyl-cellulose, and the like (e.g. supra), reading on “a thickener…the thickener containing carboxymethyl cellulose or a carboxymethyl cellulose salt;”
(3) said additional active agent, such as said anti-dandruff agent, which may be piroctone olamine, ciclopirox olamine, and mixtures thereof (e.g. supra), wherein said piroctone olamine and/or ciclopirox olamine are identical compositions to that/those of the instant invention (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0028 and 38), see also e.g. MPEP 2112.01, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness said piroctone olamine and/or ciclopirox olamine reads on the claimed property “preservative,” reading on “reading on “a preservative…the preservative containing a cyclic hydroxamic acid ethanolamine salt having Chemical Formula (1) described below:
PNG
media_image1.png
194
402
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein R1 and R2 each independently represent a hydrogen atom or a hydrocarbon group optionally having a substituent;” and,
(4) said water base (e.g. supra), reading on “a solvent…the solvent containing water.”
Regarding claims 2-4, Goldstein teaches said aqueous dispersion of claim 1, wherein said additional active agent, such as said anti-dandruff agent, may be piroctone olamine, ciclopirox olamine, and mixtures thereof (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “R1 represents a hydrocarbon group having 6 to 8 carbon atoms” (claim 2); plus, reading on “R2 represents a methyl group” (claim 3) and “the preservative contains at least one of piroctone olamine or ciclopirox olamine” (claim 4).
Regarding claim 5, Goldstein teaches said aqueous dispersion of claim 1, wherein said additional active agent, such as said anti-dandruff agent, may be piroctone olamine, ciclopirox olamine, and mixtures thereof (e.g. supra), which includes said additional active agent being only ciclopirox olamine, further noting that since the instantly claimed piroctone olamine is not required, as claimed, the instant limitation does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, reading on “a content of the piroctone olamine is greater than or equal to 0.025 mass % with respect to a total amount of the negative electrode slurry for a lithium ion secondary battery.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights