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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nurse et al. (US Patent Pub. 2013/0028853) in view of Backman et al. (WO2020086755).
Nurse et al. disclose a composition comprising a plurality of photo stabilizers that enhance SPF values of the composition (ABSTRACT). Nurse et al. disclose a spray sunscreen composition comprises alcohol at a concentration of 61.25 %; a film former, acrylates/octylacrylamide copolymer at a concentration of 2.5%; butyloctyl salicylate at a concentration of 8 %; octisalate, avobenzone and octocrylene; and polyester-8 at a concentration of 6% (TABLE 4). The composition of Nurse et al. is free from octinoxate and oxybenzone.
Nurse et al. differs from the instant claim insofar as they do not disclose a preparation comprising one or more propanediol copolymers.
Backman et al. disclose sun protection compositions (ABSTRACT). Backman et al. disclose the composition comprises bis-octyldodecyl dimer dilinoleate/propanediol copolymer at a concentration of 2%; butyloctyl salicylate at a concentration of 5%; ethylhexyl methoxycrylene at a concentration of 1% (Table 1).
Generally, it is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions, each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose. The idea for combining them flows logically from their having been individually taught in the prior art. See MPEP 2144.06. Therefore, it would have been obvious to have combined the two compositions since they are both known for spray sunscreen compositions.
Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05. Therefore, it would be obvious to have varied the amount of the known components for sunscreen compositions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NANNETTE HOLLOMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5231. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-6pm.
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 S. 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.
/NANNETTE HOLLOMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612