DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claims
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 - Indefiniteness
Claims 1-11 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.
1) A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad “an oral care agent”, and the claim also recites “in particular toothpaste or mouthwash”, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation “a calcium phosphate compound”, and the claim also recites “preferably in particulate form” and “particularly preferably hydroxyapatite” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In the present instance, claim 3 recites the broad “an amount of from 0.00001 to 4.0% by weight”, and the claim also recites “preferably from 0.0001 to 1.0% by weight and particularly preferably from 0.0005 to 0.1% by weight”, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In the present instance, claim 8 recites the broad “taurates, glycinates, sarcosinates and quaternary ammonium compounds”, and the claim also recites “preferably sodium methylcocoyl taurate, sodium cocoyl glycinate, sodium lauroyl sarcosinate, benzalkonium chloride or cetylpyridinium chloride”, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In the present instance, claim 10 recites the broad “calcium carbonate, calcium chloride, calcium bromide, calcium nitrate, calcium acetate, calcium gluconate, calcium lactate, calcium tartrate and hydrates and mixtures thereof”, and the claim also recites “calcium carbonate”, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
2) Claim 2 recites “selected from the group comprising” and then uses “or”. It is not clear if additional groups may be selected due to the recitation of “comprising” and “or”.
3) Claim 4 recites the limitation "the antibacterial substances" in the second line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
4) Claim 5 recites the limitation " the moisturizing or nourishing substances" in the second line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
5) Claim 5 recites “natural extracts”. It is not clear which substances are included in “natural extracts”.
6) Claim 6 recites the limitation " the desensitizing substances" in the second line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
7) Claim 7 recites the limitation " the cleaning agents" in the second line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
8) Claims 4-7, recite what each category of components comprises. However, they do not appear to recite whether these components are in the oral care agent. Therefore the claims are indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 - Anticipation
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DeBaun (US 20210069096).
DeBaun discloses toothpaste formulations supporting the health, well-being, and/or appearance of a user's skin (Abstract). Compositions may comprise hyaluronic acid. Active agents include caffeine (paragraph 0198). Other ingredients include strontium chloride and potassium nitrate (paragraph 0213) (instant claim 6). Remineralizing agents include 1-20% nano-hydroxyapatite. Surfactants may be added and include sodium lauryl sulfate, sodium lauroyl sarcosinate betaine, methyl glucamide and glycolipids (paragraph 0207) (instant claim 8). Antibacterials may be added and include triclosan, zinc chloride and zinc citrate (paragraph 0208) (instant claim 4). A toothpaste comprises water, sorbitol, 8% nano-hydroxyapatite (instant claims 1 and 9), vitamin C, hyaluronic acid (instant claim 5), propolis (instant claim 5), aloe, Immulina (comprises proteins, instant claim 4) bilberry, vitamin E, 10% calcium carbonate (instant claims 7 and 10), 0.10% caffeine (instant claims 1 and 3), coffee extract and flavor (Example 4). The composition comprise none of the components of instant claim 11.
In regards to claim 8, one would only need to add a surfactant to Example 4 to meet the instant claim.
Therefore DeBaun anticipates the instant claims.
Claims 1-11 are rejected.
No claims allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEZAH ROBERTS whose telephone number is (571)272-1071. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:00-7:30.
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, Frederick Krass can be reached at 571-272-0580. 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.
/LEZAH ROBERTS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612