Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/284,523

HEAD LICE TREATMENT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 27, 2023
Examiner
CHAO, ALLEN
Art Unit
1622
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Nitoff Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allow Rate
0 granted / 0 resolved
-60.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
18
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
§102
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
§112
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 0 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAILED ACTION This office action is in reply to the application filed on 27 September 2023. Currently, claims 1-14 are pending. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. GB2201942.6, filed on 14 February 2022. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 27 September 2023 was filed on the mailing date of the application on 27 September 2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification The use of the terms Silsoft CLX-E (pg. 4, line 13), Polysilicone 29 (pg. 4, line 15), 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 § 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. Claims 1-2 and 4-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momentive Performance Materials (Silsoft CLX-E Conditioning Agent Marketing Bulletin, pg. 1-12, copyright 2015-2017, https://share.google/XhWA1dPBUNDqI4X53, entered in IDS on 27 September 2023) in view of B. Rossel (Formable composition for killing arthropods and uses thereof, US PG-PUB 2010/0015064 A1, entered in IDS on 27 January 2023). Momentive Performance Materials (MPM) discloses the commercially available (circa 2015) product Silsoft CLX-E as a conditioning agent that forms a durable, crosslinked network on hair with results that are described as hair with improved manageability along with a soft, radiant appearance without weighing down hair or leaving behind residue. The chemistry of Silsoft CLX-E is described as a poly-unit polymer containing subdomains including an amine-based linker connected to a siloxane subdomain, another amine-based linker substituted by a subdomain containing siloxy-moieties, another subdomain consisting of multi-unit monomers of ethoxylate and then propoxylate bonded sequentially, and lastly another amine-based linker that is substituted to another poly-unit polymer and an undefined organic substituent, as compared to claim 1 (pg. 2). PNG media_image1.png 269 373 media_image1.png Greyscale MPM teaches that linear structures are favored for their sensory benefits, that the silicone aligns to the hair shaft to provide a specific “silky” feel to hair, that the polyether provides better water dispersibility and ease of formulation as well as improved adhesion to damaged hair, that the non-reactive amine is substantive to keratinaceous substrates (pg. 2), compared to claim 2, such as hair, to form a soft, flexible film, and lastly that the reaction portions cross-link and provide prolonged effects that can endure through washes while the polyether balances hydrophilic/hydrophobic properties leading to self-limiting deposition. In one formulation, MPM teaches a deep conditioning hair mask which utilizes the ingredients of DI water, hydroxyethylcellulose, glycerin, as compared to claim 6, cetearyl alcohol (1% by weight) (cetearyl alcohol is a mixture of cetyl and stearyl alcohols), as compared to claims 7-11, glycerol stearate and PEG-100 stearate, Silsoft CLX-E conditioning agent (5% by weight), as compared to claim 4 (pg. 9), and preservatives and fragrances. In another formulation, MPM teaches a cationic conditioner utilizing the ingredients of water, lactic acid, behenamidopropyl diethylamine, cetearyl alcohol (4.4% by weight), Silsoft CLX-E conditioning agent (6% by weight), and preservatives (pg. 9). It is noted that cetyl alcohol is a C16 fatty alcohol and stearyl alcohol is a C18 fatty alcohol. In another formulation, MPM teaches a rinse-off conditioner which utilizes the ingredients of DI water, ceteareth-20, cetearyl alcohol (3% by weight), as compared to claim 11, coconut oil, and Silsoft CLX-E conditioning agent representing a silicone active ingredient (1% by weight), as compared to claim 5 (pg. 5), and a preservative. MPM also teaches a treatment protocol for damaged hair repair wherein the protocol includes the steps of 1) after shampooing, applying repairing cream to damp hair, massaging into the hair with a focus on damaged ends, 2) allow the hair to dry with the product, and 3) briefly rinse hair and style, as compared to claims 12-14 (pg. 4). However, MPM does not disclose a composition for the use in controlling lice or their ova on an animal subject utilizing the Silsoft CLX-E product. Rossel rectifies this deficiency by teaching an active ingredient combination of hydrocarbons and siloxanes as an effective means of killing arthropods and their eggs, including lice and nits (pg. 2). In particular, the hydrocarbons are defined as “low molecular weight” with a specification of 10 to 22 carbon atoms, and siloxanes are defined as “high molecular weight” with a specification of 5 to 900 silicon atoms, as illustrated by Formulas I and II (pgs. 5-6). PNG media_image2.png 126 393 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 219 430 media_image3.png Greyscale In particular, the embodiment of formula II utilizes a similar amine or quaternary ammonium linker to incorporate other functional moieties. In the preferred form, the invention is specified to be a foamable composition, as to be applied to dried hair. As such, it would have been prima facie obvious, for a person of ordinary skill in the art, to use Silsoft CLX-E, in an appropriate formulation, in the killing and prevention of lice and their ova utilizing the teachings of Rossel, as the illustrated chemical structures of the preferred polymers include several of the sub-domain monomers as described in Silsoft CLX-E. It would therefore be reasonable to predict that Silsoft CLX-E would have the same lice and ova killing/prevention properties while imparting the hair conditioning, non-toxic properties as described by MPM. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momentive Performance Materials and Rossel as applied to claims 1-2 and 4-14 above, and further in view of Okada et al. (Fluorine-modified silicone, process for preparing the same, and cosmetics containing the same, 0657486A2, 1995). Momentive Performance Materials and Rossel disclose a composition, described by hair Silsoft CLX-E in various formulations including a low molecular cationic conditioning agent and low molecular weight glycol, that can be applied to hair as a means to control lice and ova on an animal subject or human. They do not, however, disclose a composition that includes a fluorinated silicone polymer. Okada rectifies this by teaching the use of a fluorine-modified silicone, process for preparing and the cosmetics using including shampoos, hair dressing preparations, and hair tonics. Okada teaches that the application of fluorine-modified silicone for the purpose of protecting hair and skin from water and oil and that incorporate properties such as emulsion stability, can withstand mechanical contact and controlled viscosity. The invention is illustrated with the general structure: PNG media_image4.png 204 189 media_image4.png Greyscale where R could be an aliphatic chain or siloxane in the invention (pg. 2). As such, it would be prima facie obvious, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to see that this fluorinated siloxane could be either chemically incorporated into the Silsoft CLX-E polymer backbone or as an organic substitutient from the amine linker, or to use this polymer separately in the composition as a means to impart the properties of hydro and lipophobicity to the hair product as a means of conditioning in addition to the previously taught lice and ova preventing and treating properties. Conclusion No claims are allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Allen Chao whose telephone number is (571)272-7001. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 0700-1300. 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, James H Alstrum-Acevedo can be reached at 571-272-5548. 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. /ALLEN CHAO/Examiner, Art Unit 1622 /JAMES H ALSTRUM-ACEVEDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1622
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 27, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
Grant Probability
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 0 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month