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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Receipt is acknowledged of the Information Disclosure Statement filed 21 November 2023 and 09 May 2024. The Examiner has considered the reference cited therein to the extent that each is a proper citation. Please see the attached USPTO Form.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I (claims 1-12), Species I (ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexane-1-carboxylate), and Species II (3-methyl-2-(cis-2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one) without traverse in the reply filed on 05 June 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-15 are withdrawn from consideration from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being withdrawn to a non-elected invention, and non-elected species of the invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claims.
Claims 1-12 are under examination and the requirement for restriction is made final.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 12, should have a period at the end of claim not after line 5.
In claim 4, line 27, should have a period at the end of claim not after line 21.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holland (US-20210361547-A1, located in the Information Disclosure Statement) in view of “Ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate” Thesaron et al.
With regard to claim 1, Holland teaches a fragrance composition comprising a moderately volatile fragrance material—specifically, cyclohexanecarboxylic acid, 2,2,6-trimethyl-ethyl (1R, 6S) (i.e., Ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate; CAS: 22471-55-2; Table 2A)—designed to impart a pleasant fragrance and effectively mask malodors (Abstract, para [0023]). This compound represents the claimed ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexane-1-carboxylate in Group A and reads on the claimed composition.
Holland does not teach the selection of the compound to the degree of specificity to be obvious.
In the same field of endeavor, Thesaron et al. teaches the fragrance ingredient (1R, 6S)-Ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate (Chemical Structure) exhibits desirable fresh, rich, crisp, or rosy nuances suitable for diverse perfumery applications (Application Information). Thesaron et al. further teaches this specific component is stable and substantive for use in skin, hair, and fabric applications, including toiletries, laundry detergent, and body care products (Stability and Substantivity).
With regard to the selection, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to formulate Holland’s composition to comprise the (1R, 6S)-Ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate to achieve the claimed invention. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in achieving the claimed invention, as Holland’s composition can be provided with (1R, 6S)-Ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate to successfully yield the recognized effective properties (e.g. fresh/crisp fragrance and versatile utility) as established in Thesaron et al. Therefore, given the overlapping components disclosed in a single composition, a person of ordinary skill in the art would expect the modification to be obvious.
Please note, the intended use of the above claimed composition (i.e. for reducing discomfort) does not patentably distinguish the composition, per se, since such undisclosed use is inherent in the reference composition. In order to be limiting, the intended use must create a structural difference between the claimed composition and the prior art composition.
In the instant case, the intended use does not create a structural difference, thus the intended use is not limiting (see, e.g., MPEP 2112).
With regard to claim 2, Holland teaches that the composition can be applied topically to prevent or mask body odor resulting from bacterial breakdown of perspiration (e.g., armpits, feet, and other areas of the body) (para [0022]). Holland further teaches the composition utility can also be in cleaning clothing and hard surfaces, such as floors and countertops (para [0023]). Consequently, these applications encompass a wide range of malodors—including body, scalp, bathroom, and nursing odors—typically found within the environment the malodor is created within, thus reading on the claimed specified odors.
With regard to claim 3, Holland teaches that the composition can exhibit a scent of green-type note, woody-type note, cedarwood-type note, sandalwood-type note, smoky-type note, and musk-type note (para [0161]). These notes, specifically a green-type note, can represent a “hexanal odor” wherein hexanal odor is described to be a grassy odor [in instant specification page 1, lines 18-21].
Furthermore, Holland teaches composition A4 exhibits both earthy and green notes (para [0192-0194]), thereby providing a clear motivation and demonstrating the feasibility of reducing the recited hexanal odor within Holland’s composition.
As stated above, Thesaron et al. teaches (1R, 6S)-Ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate (Chemical Structure) exhibits desirable fresh, rich, and crisp nuances (Application Information), which can strengthen the green note.
With regard to claim 10, Holland teaches that the fragrance composition may be present in an amount of approximately 0.04 to 30wt.% (para [0033]), which reads on the claimed concentration due to overlapping ranges.
Claims 4-9 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holland (US-20210361547-A1, located in the Information Disclosure Statement) in view of “Ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate” Thesaron et al. as applied to claims 1-3 and 10 above, and further in view of "Fragrance Material review on cis-jasmone" Sconamiglio et al.
With regard to claim 4, Holland teaches a fragrance composition comprising a moderately volatile fragrance material—specifically, 2-cyclopentene-1-one, 3-methyl-2-(2Z)-2-penten-1-yl- (i.e., 3 methyl-2-(2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one; CAS: 448-10-8; Table 2A)—designed to impart a pleasant fragrance and effectively mask malodors (Abstract, para [0023]). This compound represents the claimed 3 methyl-2-(2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one in Group B and reads on the claimed composition.
Holland does not teach the selection of the compound to the degree of specificity to be obvious.
In the same field of endeavor, Sconamiglio et al. teaches the fragrance ingredient cis-jasmone (i.e., 3 methyl-2-(2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one, Identification). Sconamiglio et al. further teaches that this ingredient imparts a floral odor and is utilized across various fragrance mixtures and applications, including cosmetics, fine fragrances, toiletries, laundry products, and household cleaners (Usage).
With regard to the selection, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to formulate Holland’s composition to comprise the3 methyl-2-(2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one to achieve the claimed invention. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in achieving the claimed invention, as Holland’s composition can be provided with 3 methyl-2-(2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one to successfully yield the recognized effective properties (e.g. floral odor and versatile utility) as established in Sconamiglio et al. Therefore, given the overlapping components disclosed in a single composition, a person of ordinary skill in the art would expect the modification to be obvious.
With regard to claim 5, Holland teaches that the composition can be applied topically to prevent or mask body odor resulting from bacterial breakdown of perspiration (e.g., armpits, feet, and other areas of the body) (para [0022]). Holland further teaches the composition utility can also be in cleaning clothing and hard surfaces, such as floors and countertops (para [0023]). Consequently, these applications encompass a wide range of malodors—including body, scalp, bathroom, and nursing odors—typically found within the environment the malodor is created within, thus reading on the claimed specified odors.
With regard to claim 6, Holland teaches that the composition can exhibit a scent of green-type note, woody-type note, cedarwood-type note, sandalwood-type note, smoky-type note, and musk-type note (para [0161]). These notes, specifically a green-type note, can represent a “hexanal odor” wherein hexanal odor is described to be a grassy odor [in instant specification page 1, lines 18-21].
Furthermore, Holland teaches composition A4 exhibits both earthy and green notes (para [0192-0194]), thereby providing a clear motivation and demonstrating the feasibility of reducing the recited hexanal odor within Holland’s composition.
As stated above, Thesaron et al. teaches (1R, 6S)-Ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate (Chemical Structure) exhibits desirable fresh, rich, and crisp nuances (Application Information), which can strengthen the green note.
Sconamiglio et al. further teaches cis-jasmone exhibits a floral fragrance (Usage), which can also strengthen the green note.
With regard to claim 7-9, Holland teaches that it is preferable to select at least two moderate volatile fragrance materials from Table 2A (para [0043]) in an amount ranging from approximately 30 to 70 wt.% of the total fragrance component. Holland further clarifies that when multiple fragrances are selected, the provided concentration range represents the cumulative total of all added moderately volatile fragrance materials (para [0042]), which would overlap the claimed concentration ranges for each component (group A and B).
Holland does not explicitly teach the specific weight ratio of the components (ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexane-1-carboxylate (Group A) and 3-methyl-2-(cis-2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one (Group B)).
Thesaron et al. teaches ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate at a typical use level of 0.1 to 15 wt.% (Typical Use Level), which falls within the claimed range.
Sconamilio et al. teaches that the maximum use level for 3-methyl-2-(cis-2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one in an exemplary fragrance mixture is 0.26% (4.1 Exposure assessment), which also falls within the claimed range.
With regard to the concentration, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to select and adjust the fragrance ingredients concentration at the levels established in Thesaron et al. and Sconamilio et al. or at the appropriate proportions to optimize the desired note while remaining within Holland’s concentration range represents a matter of routine optimization. Although Holland does not explicitly recite individual weight percentages for each specific component, the cited references collectively teach the same components and utility. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in achieving the claimed invention, as Holland’s composition can be provided with ethyl 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexanecarboxylate and 3 methyl-2-(2-pentenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-one to successfully yield the claimed invention. Therefore, given the overlapping components disclosed in a single composition, a person of ordinary skill in the art would expect the modification to be obvious.
With regard to claims 11-12, Holland teaches the fragrance composition can be present in an amount of approximately 0.04 to 30 wt.% (para [0033]), which reads on the claimed concentration due to overlapping ranges.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aja A Walker whose telephone number is (571)272-0037. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-5.
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 571-272-2817. 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.
/A.A.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/ANGELA C BROWN-PETTIGREW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights