Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/478,494

VEHICLE CLEANING COMPOSITIONS

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Sep 29, 2023
Examiner
BOYER, CHARLES I
Art Unit
1761
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Energizer Auto Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
773 granted / 1093 resolved
+5.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1127
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§102
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1093 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Objections Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 15 appears to contain two different ways of stating the same chelant, GLDA. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Before citing the references below, the examiner notes that the claims are broad to the point where a thorough search cannot be made. Solvents, surfactants, and chelants are ubiquitous in the detergent arts and there are likely hundreds of references that will anticipate at least claim 1. To avoid an onerous action, a few representative references are presented below, but they represent a very small sampling of prior art that could have been used. Claims 1-3, 5-14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Gambogi et al, US 7,470,653. Gambogi et al teach a light duty detergent comprising alkyl benzene sulfonate, cocoamidopropyl betaine, alkyl ether sulfate, chelant, dipropylene glycol methyl ether, perfume, dye, and the balance water (col. 6, example 1). As this reference meets all material limitations of the claims at hand, the reference is anticipatory. With respect to claims 5-14, as claim 1 requires only a single surfactant which is satisfied by the cocoamidopropyl betaine of the example, all other surfactants are optional. With respect to claim 20, as the composition is miscible in water, this claim is satisfied. Claims 1-14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Jervier, US 2023/0051664. Jervier teaches a light duty detergent comprising lauramidopropyl betaine, citric acid chelant, dipropylene glycol butyl ether, perfume, and the balance water (¶178, example B). As this reference meets all material limitations of the claims at hand, the reference is anticipatory. With respect to claims 5-14, as claim 1 requires only a single surfactant which is satisfied by the lauramidopropyl betaine of the example, all other surfactants are optional. With respect to claim 20, as the composition is miscible in water, this claim is satisfied. Claims 1-3, 5-14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Rieth et al, US 2015/0252302. Rieth et al teach a hard surface cleaner comprising alkyl benzene sulfonate, ethylene glycol butyl ether, EDTA, and the balance water (¶382, example 32A). As this reference meets all material limitations of the claims at hand, the reference is anticipatory. With respect to claims 5-14, as claim 1 requires only a single surfactant which is satisfied by the alkyl benzene sulfonate, all other surfactants are optional. With respect to claim 20, as the composition is miscible in water, this claim is satisfied. 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 1-18 and 20-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watson et al, US 2021/0230519. Watson et al teach a unit-dose glass cleaner in a polyvinyl alcohol pouch comprising dipropylene glycol butyl ether, sodium laureth sulfate, additional surfactants, and the balance water (¶70, example 2). Another example contains a colorant and fragrance (¶72, example 3). Suitable surfactants of the invention include betaines and amine oxides (¶23) and suitable additives include chelants such as EDTA and GLDA (¶40). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add a chelant to the glass cleaner of example 2 with confidence of forming an effective glass cleaner as chelants are ubiquitous in the art and are taught as a suitable component of the reference. With respect to claims 5-14, as claim 1 requires only a single surfactant which is satisfied by the laureth sulfate of the example, all other surfactants are optional. With respect to claim 20, as the composition is miscible in water, this claim is satisfied. With respect to the method claims, the composition may be used on car windows (¶4), and persons of skill in the art and consumers alike understand that unit-dose detergents must be diluted in water before use. Claims 1-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watson et al, US 2021/0230519 in view of Rieth et al, US 2015/0252302. Watson et al are relied upon as set forth above. Preferred anionic surfactants of the invention include alkylbenzenesulfonates (¶19), and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add an alkylbenzenesulfonate and chelant to the glass cleaner of example 2 with confidence of forming an effective glass cleaner as alkylbenzenesulfonates and chelants are taught as suitable components of the reference. The reference, however, does not teach an isopropylamine alkylbenzenesulfonate. Rieth et al are relied upon as set forth above. Recall Rieth et al teach hard surface cleaners where alkylbenzene sulfonates are preferred. These compositions may also be used as glass cleaners (claim 9) and suitable alkylbenzene sulfonates include isopropylamine alkyl benzene sulfonates (¶122). It is clear from Rieth et al that isopropylamine alkyl benzene sulfonates are suitable for use in hard surface/glass cleaners, and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use isopropylamine alkyl benzene sulfonate in the glass cleaner of Watson et al with confidence of forming an effective glass cleaner as Watson et al teach alkyl benzene sulfonates as suitable surfactants in their invention, and Rieth et al teach isopropylamine alkyl benzene sulfonates as effective alkyl benzene sulfonates surfactants for use in hard surface cleaners. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES I BOYER whose telephone number is (571)272-1311. The examiner can normally be reached M-S 10-430. 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 5712722817. 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. /CHARLES I BOYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 29, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 23, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600921
NO RINSE QUAT/ACID/ETHOXYLATED ALCOHOL DISINFECTANT COMPOSITION FOR FOOD CONTACT SURFACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600926
TREATMENT COMPOSITIONS WITH MODIFIED AMINO ACID DIMERS FOR DELIVERING A BENEFIT AGENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593839
FABRIC CARE COMPOSITION COMPRISING A MIXTURE OF CATIONIC BIOCIDE, FUNCTIONALIZED ALKYLPOYGLYCOSIDE, AND SULFOLAURATE SALT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595436
CHEMICAL PRODUCT COMPRISING AN ANIONIC SURFACTANT, CHELANT, AND ENZYME, AND PROCESS FOR CLEANING NANOFILTRATION AND REVERSE OSMOSIS MEMBRANES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590272
HYDROPHOBIC FINISH CAR WASH COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING AN AMINOSILICONE AND AMPHOTERIC/NONIONIC SURFACTANT MIXTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+10.3%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1093 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