CTNF 18/293,248 CTNF 83909 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 08-25 AIA Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-8, and 12 , in the reply filed on 05/12/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “the Examiner has not provided any indication that the content of the clams interpreted in light of the description was considered in making the assertion of a lack of unity . This is not found persuasive because the restriction was based on lack of unity, where the technical feature of a combination of component A, B, and C, shared between Groups I and II, were shown in the prior art. The interpretations of the claims were, in fact, made in light of the specification. Issues, such as burden, are not considered in the requirement for unity of invention . The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 9-11, 13-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-27-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-8 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chen et al., (US 2007/0041928) . Chen et al. teaches, “kits and methods for removing a long wearing or transfer resistant make-up composition form keratin materials such as eyelashes , nails, skin or lips” (Abstract). The compositions may include “at least one coloring agent . . . preferably chosen from pigments, dyes such as liposoluble dyes nacreous pigments, and/or pearling agents” (p. 12, para. [0184]). Regarding claim 2-3, “any oil soluble film forming agent can be used”, which “includes but is not limited to, polyorganosiloxane-containing polymers, silicone resins (for example, ‘MDTQ’ resins like MQ or MK resins), and silicone acrylate polymers ” (p. 2, para. [0020]). Accordingly, the reference teaches a component B, i.e. a film forming polymer other than the component A, e.g. an acrylic silicone polymer . The prior art teaches a specific embodiment: PNG media_image1.png 403 542 media_image1.png Greyscale (p. 13). Here, the cosmetic comprises component (A) “ trimethylsiloxysilicate ”, which is a MQ resin as per 1(A), (B) Nylon-611/Dimethicone , which suffices as film-forming polymer other than component A, and component C. QS Isododecane ( hydrocarbon-based volatile solvent; range includes ~84%; clm. 6 ). The content mass ratio of A over A+B, can be about 50% [5/5+5], falling within the range of 10% or more and 90% or less, as per claim 4. The total content of component A and B for Example 1 above can be about 10%, which is 1% by mass or more and 40% by mass or less, as per claim 5. Since the prior art composition contains substantially the same components in the same relative proportions as instantly claimed, it would be expected to inherently possess the same chemical and physical properties, such as hair cosmetic or cosmetic kit, as per claims 7-8 and 12. The prior art is anticipatory insofar as it teaches a cosmetic composition comprising M unit (R 1 ) 3 SiO 1/2 and Q unit SiO 4/2 , i.e., trimethylsiloxysilicate; component B film-forming polymer; and 50% by mass or more of component C, a volatile solvent, e.g. isododecane. Assuming, purely arguendo, that the prior art is not specific enough to give rise to anticipation, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art provide the claimed cosmetic in view of the teaching above. Technological Background 1) The prior art made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure Disapio et al., (International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 1988). Disapio et al. is pertinent for teaching, “Initially used in skin care products, and more recently in hair care applications , silicones are recognized for their lubricating properties and for the characteristic soft smooth feel they impart. With recent advances in silicone technology, these fluids can also provide substantivity and durability ” (Summary) “In hair care products, organofunctional silicones , particularly those with amine functionality, provide substantive, durable conditioning properties. These properties can be related to the molecular weight and mole percent amine present. Conditioning properties are durable through a number of washes , yet the substantive films are -self-limiting and do not pose a problem of build-up ” (p. 76, 3 rd paragraph). 2) The prior art made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure Glenn Corp (BRB TMS-5OI, May 2015). Glenn Corp is pertinent for teaching features and benefits of Trimethylsiloxysilicate in isododecane, i.e., BRB TMS-5OI, which “can be used in a wide range of personal care applications such as Colour cosmetics, Sun care, Hair Care, antiperspirants and deodorants” (Application). Features and benefits include: “Due to the high volatility of isosodecane, the solvent quicklyevaporates during application leaving behind a water insoluble highly durable film of trimethylsiloxysilicate”; “ Wash-off and rub-off resistant, long lasting effect ”: “Hair Care: fixative, frizz control” Conclusion Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER E WEBB whose telephone number is (571)270-3287 and fax number is (571) 270-4287. The examiner can normally be reached from Mon-Fri 7-3:30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sahana Kaup can be reached (571) 272-6897. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Walter E. Webb /WALTER E WEBB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612 Application/Control Number: 18/293,248 Page 2 Art Unit: 1612 Application/Control Number: 18/293,248 Page 3 Art Unit: 1612 Application/Control Number: 18/293,248 Page 4 Art Unit: 1612 Application/Control Number: 18/293,248 Page 5 Art Unit: 1612
Prosecution Insights