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
Restriction/Election
Applicant’s election of group I, claims 1-5 and 13 in the reply filed on 03/31/26 is acknowledged. Applicant’s election of the following species is also acknowledged. 1. A specific hydrophobic material: Perfume A of Table 2 2. A specific mineral: No election can be made at least for the reasons described above. 3. A specific salt: Barium sulfate 4. A specific terminating surface: Whey protein and caseinate 5. A specific polyelectrolye scaffolding: No election can be made at least for the reasons described above. 6. A specific polymeric shell: Polyurea 7. A specific component of the core: Perfume A of Table 2. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 6-12 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/31/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Macedo Tavares (US PG Pub. 2018/0243717 A1).
Macedo Tavares discloses microcapsules with an active agent core and a shell (abs). In particular, Macedo Tavares discloses a hydrophobic active agent, an alcohol-isocyanate polymeric shell and a rough TiO2 shell (Figs 1, 2 and 3 with accompanying text). Macedo Tavares discloses the claimed fragrance/deodorizing agent (¶20, 50, 133 and claim 16).
Claim(s) 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lentz (US PG Pub. 2018/0009996 A1).
Lentz discloses microcapsules with a core encapsulated within a polymer wall and an inorganic shell connected to an exterior surface of the polymer wall by a surfactant (abs). Further, Lentz discloses a hydrophobic core, a polyurea with charged functional shell and an inorganic shell such as calcium carbonate (Fig. 1 and table 1 with accompanying text). Lentz discloses the steps of forming the wall with a polymer with an anionic surfactant, adding an inorganic precursor and forming the inorganic shell (Figs. 1 with accompanying text and examples).
Claim(s) 1, 3-5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dreher (WO 2010/003762A1). A machine translation is provided and referenced from hereon.
Dreher discloses microcapsules with a core/jacket/jacket structure with one water insoluble organic agent – the jacket is construed as a shell and the insoluble agent as the oil (abs). Further, Dreher discloses a charged polymer shell such as gelatin and an inorganic shell such as TiO2 or Fe2O3 (pg. 4-5). Dreher discloses the perfume oil component (pg. 3). Dreher discloses the steps of forming the wall with a polymer with an anionic group, adding an inorganic precursor and forming the inorganic shell (pg. 6, 7, 9-10).
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.
Claims 1-5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White et al. (WO 2020/227762 A1, presented in IDS).
White et al. discloses (the references in parenthesis applying to this document) a microcapsule comprising a fluid core and an ionic shell (claim 1). The fluid core of White et al. comprises an oil carrier (claim 16). The fluid core of White et al. is encapsulated by an inner coating, wherein said ionic shell encapsulates said inner coating (claim 19). The inner coating of White et al. is charged (page 33, lines 11-20). The ionic shell of White et al. comprises, is formed from or consists of one or more ionic compounds (page 14, lines 16-17). The ionic compounds of White et al. are magnesium phosphate, magnesium sulphate, magnesium carbonate, strontium phosphate, strontium sulphate, strontium carbonate, barium phosphate, barium sulphate, barium carbonate (page 15, lines 3-9). The inner coating of White et al. is polyurea (claim 22). The microcapsule of White et al. comprises an active agent in its fluid core, said active agent being a perfume or a flavour (claim 18). White et al. also discloses a composition comprising the microcapsules of White et al. (claim 40). Said composition is used in a personal care product (claim 50). The composition of White et al. is also used in a food product (page 5, lines 7-10). White et al. also discloses a process for the preparation of the microcapsules of White et al. comprising the in-situ growing of the ionic compound of White et al. around the inner coating of the fluid core of White et al. (page 14, lines 25-28). The inner coating of White et al. is formed by interfacial polymerization in the presence of an emulsifier (page 29, lines 12-17). The emulsifier of White et al. may be cetyl trimethylammonium bromide (page 29, lines 6-11). Alternatively, the emulsifier of White et al. may be an anionic surface-modifying agent (page 31, line 25 - page 32, line 2; page 32, lines 7-10). The "perfume" of White et al. is considered to represent a "hydrophobic material" as defined in present claim 1. The "charged inner coating" of White et al. is considered to represent a "shell having a terminating charged functional surface" as defined in present claim 1. The "personal care product" of White et al. is considered to represent a "consumer product". The "food product" of White et al. is considered to represent a "flavoured consumer product". The "anionic surface-modifying agent" of White et al. is considered to represent an "anionic emulsifier".
Thus, the art teaches use of a mineralized core-shell microcapsule comprising a core, a shell having a terminating charged functional surface and a mineral layer on the terminating charged functional surface wherein the salt is barium sulfate. This combination is not in a single embodiment. However, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results of making a mineralized core-shell microcapsule comprising barium sulfate from among other salts, see MPEP 2143 part (I)(A).
Claims 1, 3-5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan et al (US 2011/0117180 A1) in view of Dybing (US 2004/0043124 A1), Dardelle et al (US 2015/0250689 A1; hereafter as "Dardelle '689").
Yan teaches core/shell microcapsules suspension comprising microcapsules made of an oil-based core such as a flavor oil, and an outer shell comprising a protein such as a mixture of sodium caseinate and whey protein, wherein the shell is crosslinked (Abstract; [0005]-[0006], [0025], [0030], [0033], [0047], [0068], [0090]; Example 13; claims 1, 8, 19-20, 35, 66, 77, 88, 90 and 105).
Yan does not teach the protein is complexed with a salt; the inner shell made of a polymerized polyfunctional monomer and the amount of polymerized polyfunctional monomer.
Dybing teaches the treatment of protein with salt enhances the protein's ability to emulsify fat/oil in water, wherein the protein includes sodium caseinate, potassium caseinate, calcium caseinate and whey protein concentrate, and the salt includes sodium chloride, potassium chloride, and calcium chloride ([0009], [0014], [0016]-[0017], [0021]-[0022], [0031]- [0034], [0041], [0043], [0044], [0046], [0053], [0066], and [0073]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use protein treated with a salt (a protein complexed with a salt) as the protein in Yan, and produce the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Dybing indicated that the use of protein that is treated with salt enhances the protein's ability to emulsify fat/oil in water. Thus, provided that Yan discloses that the microcapsules containing an outer shell made from protein and an oil-based core, and the production of said microcapsules require emulsification of protein and oil in water (Yan: [0033], [0075], [0077]-[0080], [0125], and [0181]-[0182]), it would have been obvious to use to protein treated with a salt (a protein complexed with a salt) as the protein in the emulsification step of Yan so as the salt treated protein enhances the protein's ability to emulsify oil in water, and achieve Applicant's claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding the inner shell made of a polymerized polyfunctional monomer of, Dardelle '689 teaches a multilayer core/shell microcapsules suspension comprising microcapsules made of an oil-based core such as a perfume oil or a flavor oil, and an outer shell comprising a protein, wherein the protein is crosslinked (Abstract; [0011]-[0013], [0021]-[0034], [0040]-[0042]; Examples 1-5; claims 1-12 and 14-15). Dardelle '689 teaches the core/shell microcapsules further comprises an inner shell made of polymerized polyisocyanate having at least two isocyanate functional groups ([0027] and [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the core- shell microcapsule slurry of Yan to include an inner shell made of a polymerized polyisocyanate having at least two polyisocyanate functional groups, and produce the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Dardelle '689 provided the guidance to do so by teaching that the core-shell microcapsules suspension comprising microcapsules containing an oil core and an outer shell comprising a protein can further comprise an inner shell made of polymerized polyisocyanate having at least two isocyanate functional groups, and such inner shell (polyurea) provides additional and superior barrier properties to obtain microcapsules that exhibit excellent resistance against evaporation of active agent when the capsules are in the dry state as well as excellent resistance against destabilization of the capsules in harsh environment (Dardelle '689: [0011]-[0013], [0021]-[0034], [0040]-[0042] and [0131]). Thus, an ordinary artisan seeking to maximize the barrier properties of the microcapsules of Yan so as the obtained microcapsules exhibit excellent resistance against evaporation of active agent when the capsules are in the dry state as well as excellent resistance against destabilization of the capsules in harsh environment, would have looked to including an inner shell made of a polymerized polyisocyanate having at least two polyisocyanate functional groups (such as polyurea), and achieve Applicant's claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SNIGDHA MAEWALL whose telephone number is (571)272-6197. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM to 5PM.
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, Sahana S. Kaup can be reached on 571-272-6897. 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.
/SNIGDHA MAEWALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612
Prosecution Insights