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
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-10, and 16-20 are pending.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-5, 7-10, 16-18, and 20 in the reply filed on 12/29/25 is acknowledged.
Claims 6 and 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/29/25.
Claims 1-5, 7-10, 16-18, and 20 are examined on the merits.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-5, and 7-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “CPTG essential oil” at line 12, which is incorrect. Applicant should spell out the full name of CPTG first time it appears in the claim.
All other cited claims depend directly or indirectly from objected claims and are, therefore, also, objected for the reasons set forth above.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu et al (CN 106511215 A).
Hu et al teach the invention belongs to the technical field of cosmetics and particularly relates to eye cream (thus claim 4 is partially met) with the effects of moisturizing and wrinkle resistance and a preparation method of the eye cream. The eye cream with the effects of moisturizing and wrinkle resistance is prepared from, by mass, 12-20% of wheat germ oil, 12-20% of cocoa extract (thus claim 7 is partially met), 2-3% of aloe extract, 2-3% of essential oil of Jasminum (thus 2:1 to 10:1, thus claim 16 is met, claim 10 is partially met), 2-3% of licoflavone, 2-3% of collagen, 1-2.5% of glutathione, 1-2% of collagen tripeptide (thus 100% tripeptide, thus greater than 70%, thus claim 20 is met), 1-2% of astaxanthin, 1-2% of glycerinum, 1-2% of dimethicone, 1-2% of sodium alginate (thus one constituent component, thus claim 1 is partially met), 1-2% of sorbitol and 33.5-61% of water (thus free of color, thus claim 9 is partially met). The eye cream has the technical advantages that irritation to skin is avoided, and the effects of moisturizing and wrinkle resistance on the skin around the eyes are good (see Abstract).
Therefore, the reference is deemed to anticipate the instant claim above.
Claim Rejections –35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 4, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kong (CN 106691940 A).
Kong teaches Preferred Method: Mixing under stirring condition in a vacuum homogenization emulsifier at a pressure of -0.08 to -0.5 MPa and emulsifying (thus an emulsion, thus claim 4 is met) for 1-2 hours at a speed of 30-85 revolutions/minute. Preferred Composition: The massage oil composed of functional essential oil (thus essential oil component) (1 pts. wt. ginger essential oil, 0.5 pts. wt. rosemary essential oil and 0.5 pts. wt. sweet orange essential oil), the moisturizing grease (5 pts. wt. pentaerythritol diisostearate (thus at least one whole or partial constituent component, thus claim 2 is met), 43.67 pts. wt. ethylhexyl palmitate, glycerol tri-2-ethyl-hexanoate, 1 pts. wt. camellia seed oil, 0.1 pts. wt. tocopherol acetate), 0.2 pts. wt. heat sensitizer, 3 pts. wt. polyglyceryl-3-diisostearate, 5 pts. wt. polyethylene glycol-15 stearate, skin nutritional agent ( 0.1 pts. wt. collagen tripeptide (thus 100% tripeptide, thus greater than 70%), 0.01 pts. wt. snow lotus extract (thus one extract, thus claim 7 is met) and 0.01 pts. wt. mountain heat velvet extract. Preferred Components: The functional essential oil is ginger essential oil, rosemary essential oil, sweet orange essential oil, jasmine essential oil, Juniper essential oil, fennel essential oil, lavender essential oil and/or geranium essential oil. The moisturizing grease is pentaerythritol diisostearate, ethylhexyl palmitate, glycerol tri-2-ethyl-hexanoate, isononyl isononanoate, diethylhexylcyclohexane, dimethyl silicone oil, isononyl isononanoate, octanoic acid or capric glyceride, jojoba oil, tocopherol acetate, camellia seed oil, shea tree fruit ester, maize germ oil, apricot kernel oil, rice bran oil, sweet almond oil and/or avocado oil. The skin nutritional agent is collagen tripeptide, snow lotus extract and/or mountain heat velvet extract (see Equivalent Abstract) (thus free of color, thus claim 9 is met).
Kong does not teach using CPTG essential oil or the purity of collagen.
It would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use various purity of essential oil or collagen, including Certified Pure Tested Grade (CPTG) essential oil. Determining an appropriate degree of essential oil or collagen is deemed merely a matter of judicious selection and routine optimization which is well within the purview of the skilled artisan.
From the teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of the ordinary skills in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention.
Thus, the invention as a whole is prima facie obvious over the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Claims 1, 4, 7-10, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hu et al as applied to claims 16 and 20 above.
The teachings of Hu et al are set forth above and applied as before.
The teachings of Hu et al do not specifically teach using CPTG essential oil or the purity of collagen.
It would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use various purity of essential oil or collagen, including Certified Pure Tested Grade (CPTG) essential oil. Determining an appropriate degree of essential oil or collagen is deemed merely a matter of judicious selection and routine optimization which is well within the purview of the skilled artisan.
From the teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of the ordinary skills in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention.
Thus, the invention as a whole is prima facie obvious over the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Claims 1, 5, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fang (CN 113854336 A).
Fang teaches the invention relates to the field of health-care food (thus clam 5 is met), in particular to a low-sugar cake for diabetics and a preparation method of the low-sugar cake. The low-sugar pastry comprises the following components in parts by weight: 40-60 parts of wheat flour, 15-25 parts of vegetable oil, 1-4 parts of silybum marianum seed oil (thus the claimed essential oil), 20-25 parts of oat flour, 3-7 parts of tartary buckwheat flour, 4-8 parts of yam flour, 12-15 parts of radix puerariae powder, 1-10 parts of konjaku flour, 1-5 parts of oat glucan, 2-6 parts of corn oligopeptide powder, 1-5 parts of collagen tripeptide (thus 100% tripeptide, thus greater than 70%), 2-6 parts of wolfberry powder, 3-8 parts of vital gluten and 7-10 parts of a walnut mushroom extract (thus claim 7 is met), 10-13 parts of low-sugar non-dairy milk and 8-15 parts of a low-sugar compound sweetening agent (thus free of preservative, thus claim 9 is met). The preparation method sequentially comprises the following steps: preparing materials; stirring for the first time; stirring for the second time; D, preparing and forming;e, baking, wherein the baking temperature is 180 DEG C, and the baking time is 13 min; and F, packaging. The low-sugar pastry has the effects of being fresh, cool, not greasy, low in calorie, low in sugar and even free of sugar, is good in taste and is particularly suitable for people suffering from diabetes to use (see Abstract).
Fang does not teach using CPTG essential oil or the purity of collagen.
It would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use various purity of essential oil or collagen, including Certified Pure Tested Grade (CPTG) essential oil. Determining an appropriate degree of essential oil or collagen is deemed merely a matter of judicious selection and routine optimization which is well within the purview of the skilled artisan.
From the teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of the ordinary skills in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention.
Thus, the invention as a whole is prima facie obvious over the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed (claims 2, 3, 17, and 18 are free of art).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIUWEN MI whose telephone number is (571)272-5984. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anand Desai can be reached on 571-272-0947. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/Qiuwen Mi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1655
Prosecution Insights