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 .
Applicants' arguments in the Request for Continued Examination, filed July 1, 2026, have been fully considered. Rejections and/or objections not reiterated from previous office actions are hereby withdrawn. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 – Obviousness (New Rejection)
Claims 1-13, 16-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porter et al. (WO 2010/141693).
Porter et al. disclose stabilized oral care compositions. The composition may comprise an antioxidant such as sodium ascorbyl phosphate. Sodium ascorbyl phosphate may be used in an amount of 0.2% (Examples). Stannous fluoride may be used as the fluoride source and comprises 0.3 to 5% by weight of the composition. Tetrasodium pyrophosphate is used and comprises 1% to 6 wt% of the composition. The composition may be formulated into mouthwashes. Zinc salts may be used and include zinc citrate. Amino acids may be added and include arginine. Humectants may be used and include glycerin, sorbitol and propylene glycol. Mouthwashes comprise water and humectants. The composition is buffered to a pH of at least 7.
An example comprises tetrasodium pyrophosphate and sodium ascorbyl phosphate (see Examples).
The dentifrice exemplified comprise at least 20% water. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that a mouthwash would also comprise at least 20% water.
The composition does not comprise potassium nitrate.
The compositions are oral care composition comprising fluoride, and therefore, would reduce or inhibit formation of dental caries.
A composition comprising a combination of a fluoride, tetrasodium pyrophosphate and sodium ascorbyl phosphate is contemplated by Porter et al. However, Porter et al. do not exemplify a mouthwash.
Therefore, Porter et al. is not anticipatory insofar as they do not specifically disclose an example comprising sodium ascorbyl phosphate in combination with a stannous compound and tetrasodium pyrophosphate. Generally, it is prima facie obvious to select a known material for incorporation into a composition, based on its recognized suitability for its intended use. See MPEP 2144.07. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have added used stannous fluoride in combination with tetrasodium pyrophosphate and sodium ascorbyl phosphate and formulated the composition into a mouthwash because the combination is suggested by Porter et al.
In regards to the amounts, the sodium ascorbyl phosphate may comprise 0.2% by weight the composition. The stannous may comprise 0.3 wt.% to 5 wt.% and tetrasodium pyrophosphate may comprises 1 to about 6% by weight. These ranges overlap those recited by the instant claims. When 0.2% ascorbyl phosphate is used with 2% stannous fluoride and 2% tetrasodium pyrophosphate, the amounts meet the ratio of 1:1:0.1 of the instant claims. Therefore the ratios encompassed by Porter et al. overlap those of the instant claims. It is well-settled, that even a slight overlap in range establishes a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05. Accordingly, since an overlap plainly exists here, it would have been obvious to have selected values within the overlap.
Conclusion
Claims 1, 3-13, 17, 19 and 21 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
Prosecution Insights