Claims 1-15 are pending in this application.
DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1 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
2 Claims 2-15 objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 2-15, in line 1, the phrase “A water-soluble” should be replaced with “The water-soluble”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3 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 1-15 are 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 “ a sealed internal compartment” and “internal compartment”. It is unclear if there are two different internal compartments, sealed internal compartment and internal compartment (non sealed internal compartment)?. The claimed specification does not provide any guidance. Clarification is required.
Claim 1 recites the percentage amounts of linear alkylbenzene sulphonate and the percentage amount of magnesium linear alkyl benzene sulphonate. It is unclear if the recited percentage amounts are based on the total weight of granular laundry detergent or based on total weight of the surfactant system? The claimed specification does not provide any guidance. Clarification is required.
Claims 2-5 recite the percentage amounts of linear alkyl benzene sulphonate and magnesium linear alkyl benzene sulphonate. It is unclear if the recited percentage amounts of these surfactants are based on the total weight of granular laundry detergent or based on the total weight of the surfactant system? The claimed specification does not provide any guidance. Clarification is required.
Claims 6-15 are dependent upon rejected base claim. Therefore, claims 6-15 are rejected as well.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4 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.
5 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 1-5 and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullivant et al. (EP 3919595 A1) in view of Das et al. (EP 1967512 A2).
Bullivant et al. (EP 3919595 A1) teaches a water-soluble unit does article comprising a water-soluble fibrous non-woven sheet and a granular laundry detergent composition, wherein the granular laundry detergent composition comprises a first plurality of particles, wherein the water-soluble fibrous non-woven sheet is shaped to form a sealed internal compartment, wherein the fibers comprise polyvinyl alcohol polymer and wherein the granular detergent composition is comprised within the internal compartment and wherein the water-soluble fibrous non-woven sheet comprises a plurality of fibers (see page 2, paragraph, 0007), and wherein the granular laundry detergent composition comprises surfactants include alkyl benzene sulfonate in the amount of 33% by wt., of the granular laundry detergent (see page 6, paragraph, 0058 and 15, paragraph, 0155, Table 2), wherein the water-soluble unit does comprises polyvinyl polymer having a weight average molecular weight of 70kDa or less as clamed in claim 10 (see page 2, paragraph, 0007), and wherein polyvinyl polymer is a polyvinyl alcohol homopolymer as claimed in claim 11 (see page 4, paragraph, 0036), wherein polyvinyl polymer has an average percentage degree of hydrolysis of from 75% to 100% as claimed in claim 12 (see page 4, paragraph, 0036), wherein the fibers comprises a gel breaker selected from polyols or sugar alcohols as claimed in claim 13 (see page 4, paragraph, 0041), wherein the fibers are present between 80% and 95% by weight of the water-soluble fibrous non-woven sheet as claimed in claim 14 (see page 4, paragraph, 0031) and wherein the water-soluble fibrous non-woven sheet has a basis weight of between 20gsm and 60gsm as claimed in claimed in claim 15 (see page 3, paragraph, 0022).
The claims differ from the teaching of Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1) by reciting a granular detergent composition comprising magnesium linear alkyl benzene sulphonate in the claimed amounts.
However, Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1) clearly teaches a granular detergent composition comprising surfactants include alkyl benzene sulphonate (see page 15, paragraphs, 0054-0055, Tables 1 and 2).
Das et al. (EP’ 512 A2) in analogous art of detergent formulations, teaches a solid detergent composition comprising from 5 to 90% magnesium salt of linear alkyl benzene sulphonic acid (sulphonate) which is overlapped with the claimed amounts as claimed in claims 1-5 (see claim 14).
Therefore, in view of the teaching of Das et al. (EP’ 512 A2), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to be motivated to modify the detergent composition of Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1) by incorporating magnesium salt of linear alkyl benzene sulphonic acid (sulphonate) as taught by Das et al. (EP’ 512 A2) to arrive at the claimed invention. Such a modification would be obvious based on the teaching of Das et al. (EP’ 512 A2), that referred to use of magnesium salt of linear alkyl benzene sulphonic acid (sulphonate) to provide detergent powders/granules having high rate of dissolution and relatively low bulk density (see page 3, paragraph, 0011), and, thus, the person of the ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the linear alkyl benzene sulphonic acid (sulphonate) as a surfactant in the detergent composition of Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1) with a reasonable expectation of success for improving the property of the detergent composition and would expect that such a detergent composition to have similar property to those claimed, absent unexpected results.
6 Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullivant et al. (EP 3919595 A1) in view of Das et al. (EP 1967512 A2) and further, in view of Casey et al. (US 20040110656 A1).
The disclosures of Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1) and Das et al. (EP’ 512 A2) do not teach granular laundry detergent comprising linear alkylbenzene sulphonate in a form of a flake as claimed.
However, Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1) clearly teaches granular laundry composition comprising surfactant flakes and a plurality of chemical different particles include zeolite particles and silicate particles (see page 6, paragraph, 0055).
Casey et al. (US’ 656 A1) in other analogous art of detergent formulations, teaches a solid detergent composition comprising a solid surfactant used as a laundry detergent composition (see page 2, paragraphs, 0049-0050) and wherein the solid surfactant comprises alkylbenzene sulphonate in a form of particle flakes having a size with the range of from 200 micron to 1000 microns as claimed in claims 6 and 9 (see claims 1, 6-7 and 14-17) and wherein the solid detergent composition also comprises particles include soil release agents as claimed in claim 8 (see page 3, paragraph, 0055) and wherein the solid laundry detergent does not comprise water as claimed in claim 7 (see the whole disclosure).
Therefore, in view of the teaching of Casey et al. (US’ 656 A1), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to modify the solid laundry detergent composition of Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1) by incorporating the surfactant of alkylbenzene sulphonate in a form of particle flakes as taught by Casey et al. (US’ 656 A1) to arrive at the claimed invention. Such a modification would have been obvious based on the teaching of Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1) that referred to use surfactant flakes in a granular laundry composition, and, thus, the person of the ordinary skill in the art would expect that the use of the surfactant of alkylbenzene sulphonate in a form of particle flakes as taught by Casey et al. (US’ 656 A1) would be similarly useful and applicable to the analogous granular laundry composition taught by Bullivant et al. (EP’ 595 A1), absent unexpected results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EISA B ELHILO whose telephone number is (571)272-1315. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM to 3:30 PM.
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.
/EISA B ELHILO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761