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 .
Response to Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on February 23, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that no adequate reason have been provided. This is not found persuasive because it was stated in the Requirement the reason, the product may be used for a different method. A search for the product would not necessarily lead to the recited method. Burden consists not only of specific searching of classes and subclasses, but also of searching multiple databases for foreign references and literature searches. Burden also resides in the examination of independent claim set for clarity, enablement and double patenting issues. Further, a reference that would anticipate the invention of one group would not necessarily anticipate or even make obvious another group. Finally, the consideration for patentability is different in each case. Thus, it would be an undue burden to examine all of the above inventions in one application and the restriction for examination purposes as indicated above is deemed proper.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 19 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on February 23, 2026.
Claims
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “mixures” should read “mixtures”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 - Indefiniteness
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the glyceryl ether" in the third line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites a group of glyceryl ethers in lines 16-17. The claim is missing an “and” or an “or”.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claim 4 recites the broad recitation fatty alcohol, and the claim also recites preferably selected from cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, cetearyl alcohol, behenyl alcohol, arachidyl alcohol, myristyl alcohol, isocetly alcohol and oleyl alcohol, and mixtures thereof, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In the present instance, claim 14 recites the broad recitation one or more amine or quaternary ammonium surfactant is selected from stearyl amine, stearoylethyl amine, stearamidopropyldimethylamine, behenamidropyl dimethyl amine, stearyl amine, palmamine, oleamine, palmitamine, stearoxypropyl dimethylamine, cetrimonium chloride, steartrimonium chloride, behentrimonium chloride and the claim also recites preferably said surfactant is selected from stearoxypropyl dimethylamine and cetrimonium chloride, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 - Anticipation
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-9, 11, 13-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (KR 102276289).
Kim et al. disclose compositions for hair that strengthen damaged hair (Abstract). Polyols are used an include glycerin and propylene glycol. Cationic surfactants are used and include behentrimonium chloride and cetrimonium chloride. Cationic surfactant comprise 5 to 10% by weight of the composition. Vitamins may be used and include ascorbic acid in an amount of 0.1 to 1%. Preservatives include ethylhexylglycerin and 1,2-hexanediol. Preservatives comprise 0.1 to 2% by weight of the composition. The composition may also comprise a pH adjusting agent including citric acid and malic acid, in an amount of 1 to 3% by weight. A solvent is preferably at least one selected from the group consisting of benzyl alcohol, butyl acetate, acetone, ethanol, ethoxydiglycol, methylpyrrolidone and propylene carbonate. The solvent comprises 20 to 30% by weight. The pH ranges from 4.5 to 7. Agents to adjust the pH include lactic acid, malic acid, and citric acid. An example comprises 2% behentrimonium chloride (quaternary ammonium), 12% myristyl alcohol (fatty alcohol), 46.59% propylene glycol (polyol), 25% ethanol, 2% cetrimonium chloride (quaternary ammonium), 0.2% ethylhexylglycerin (glyceryl ether) and no water.
Kim et al. anticipate the instant claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 - Obviousness
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 1-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (KR 102276289).
Kim et al. disclose compositions for hair that strengthen damaged hair (Abstract). Polyols are used an include glycerin and propylene glycol. Cationic surfactants are used and include behentrimonium chloride and cetrimonium chloride. Cationic surfactant comprise 5 to 10% by weight of the composition. Vitamins may be used and include ascorbic acid in an amount of 0.1 to 1%. Preservatives include ethylhexylglycerin and 1,2-hexanediol. Preservatives comprise 0.1 to 2% by weight of the composition. The composition may also comprise a pH adjusting agent including citric acid and malic acid, in an amount of 1 to 3% by weight. A solvent is preferably at least one selected from the group consisting of benzyl alcohol, butyl acetate, acetone, ethanol, ethoxydiglycol, methylpyrrolidone and propylene carbonate. The solvent comprises 20 to 30% by weight. The pH ranges from 4.5 to 7. Agents to adjust the pH include lactic acid, malic acid, and citric acid. Fatty alcohols may comprise 5% to 15% by weight of the composition. An example comprises 2% behentrimonium chloride (quaternary ammonium), 12% myristyl alcohol (fatty alcohol), 46.59% propylene glycol (polyol), 25% ethanol, 2% cetrimonium chloride (quaternary ammonium), 0.2% ethylhexylglycerin (glyceryl ether) and no water.
Kim et al. differ from the instant claims insofar as they do not disclose the exact amount of polyol.
Kim et al. disclose that the polyol may comprise the remaining amount of the disclosed composition. It would have taken no more than the relative skill of one of ordinary skill in the art to have used amounts overlapping 60 to 90% in the disclosed composition to meet the remaining amount of the composition based on the amounts of each component and their appropriate ranges.
In regards to the fatty alcohol, It is well-settled, however, that even a slight overlap in range establishes a prima facie case of obviousness. The fatty alcohol may comprise 5 to 15% by weight of the composition whereas the claims recite 0.1 to 10%. Accordingly, since an overlap plainly exists here, it would have been obvious to have selected values within the overlap. See MPEP 2144.05.
In regards to the glyceryl ether ranging from 0.25 to 5%, Kim et al. disclose preservatives comprise 0.1 to 2% by weight of the composition. Accordingly, since an overlap plainly exists here, it would have been obvious to have selected values within the overlap. See MPEP 2144.05.
In regards to the acid, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filing the instant application to have added an acid, such as citric acid, because it is suggested by Kim et al., as the pH adjusting agent.
Claims 1-18 and 20 are rejected.
No claims allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEZAH ROBERTS whose telephone number is (571)272-1071. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:00-7:30.
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 Kaup can be reached at 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.
/LEZAH ROBERTS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612