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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-17, in the reply filed on 6/19/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that Applicant that the inventions are interrelated and that a search of one group of claims will reveal art to the other, and that the invention of Group I is useful in the inventions of Groups II and IV, and it is believed that the inventions of Groups I, II, and IV are closely related in the Technical Field so a proper search of any of the claims would, by necessity, require a proper search of the other.
This is not found persuasive because the instant application is a national stage entry filed under 35 U.S.C. 371 and is therefore not subject to US restriction practice but rather subject to lack of unity practice, see MPEP 1893.03(d). It is noted that undue search burden is not a criterion in lack of unity analysis. The test is whether or not special technical features can be established. It is noted that inventions listed as Groups I-IV do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features as set forth in Herrlein et al (US20200093730), below.
Therefore, given that the Examiner has properly established that Groups I-IV lack, it is the Examiner's position that the restriction is proper. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5, 8-9 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herrlein et al (US20200093730).
Herrlein teaches a dual polymer component hair coloring composition.
Herrlein, abstract, teaches dual component hair coloring composition, the composition comprising composition A comprising a cationic polymer, pigment microparticles and an aqueous medium, and comprising composition B.
Herrlein, paragraph 15 of the PGPUB, teaches in addition to components of compositions A and B, these compositional components of the hair coloring composition may optionally contain additional components in this mixture. These additional components include but not limited to one or more of dispersants, surface treatment agents for the pigment microparticles, plasticizers, conditioners, suspending agents, thickening agents, adjuvants, moisturizers, surfactants, fatty substances, waxes, fatty amides and soluble organic dyes of colors different from those of the pigment microparticles.
Herrlein, paragraph 63 of the PGPUB, teaches the cationic polymer(s) may have a weight average molecular weight of more than 0.5 kDa (500 Da=500 g/mol)
Herrlein, paragraph 135 of the PGPUB, teaches the pigments can have a D50[vol] particle diameter of from 0.001 micron to 1 micron.
Herrlein, paragraph 156 of the PGPUB, teaches the hair coloring composition comprises from about 0.01% to about 40%, about 0.05% to about 35%, about 0.1 to about 25%, or about 0.15% and about 20% pigment(s), by weight of the hair coloring composition.
Herrlein, paragraph 158 of the PGPUB, teaches the pigment(s) can also be colored pigments. The pigment(s) can be selected from the group consisting of metal oxides, mixed phase pigments, and the metals themselves (bronze pigments).
Herrlein, paragraph 262 of the PGPUB, teaches the material for dispersing, also referred to as dispersant, can include, for example, a cationic polymer, a polymeric dispersant, and/or a surfactant.
Herrlein, paragraph 262 of the PGPUB, teaches the pigment microparticles can be dispersed in composition A with the addition of at least one of a dispersant and a wetting agent.
Herrlein, paragraph 294 of the PGPUB, teaches in other instances, where the pigments are different, but compatible, two or more different dispersants can be used
Herrlein, paragraph 295 of the PGPUB, teaches in some instances the cationic polymer may also act as a dispersant for the pigments.
Herrlein, paragraph 288 of the PGPUB, teaches the dispersant can be a surfactant, an oligomer (e.g., example, oligomers have up to 20 monomeric units, polymers have at least 20 monomeric units), a polymer, or a mixture of several thereof, bearing at least one functional group with strong affinity for the surface of the pigment microparticles. For example, they can physically or chemically attach to the surface of the pigment microparticles. These dispersants also contain at least one functional group that is compatible with or soluble in the continuous medium. Poly(12-hydroxystearic acid) stearate with a molecular weight of about 750 g/mol, such as the product sold under the name SOLSPERSE 21,000 by the company Avecia are used.
Herrlein, paragraph 291 of the PGPUB, teaches representative dispersants are also available from a variety of suppliers such as SOLSPERSE M387 and RHODACAL ™ IPAM which is isopropyl amine dodecylbenzene sulfonate having a viscosity of 10,000 cps.
SOLSPERSE M387 or the cationic polymer as taught by the reference reads on a polymeric dispersant having an average molecular weight greater than or equal to 2000 atomic mass units.
RHODACAL ™ IPAM which is isopropyl amine dodecylbenzene sulfonate or poly(12-hydroxystearic acid) stearate as taught by the reference reads on a second dispersant comprising a molecular weight less than 2000 g/mol.
It 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 to have a composition comprising:
pigment microparticles having a D50[vol] particle diameter of from 0.001 micron to 1 micron
SOLSPERSE M387 or the cationic polymer and
RHODACAL ™ IPAM which is isopropyl amine dodecylbenzene sulfonate or poly(12-hydroxystearic acid) stearate
as this is one possible combination of components forming composition A as taught by the Herrlein.
Regarding claim 2, the reference teaches isopropyl amine dodecylbenzene sulfonate which is a non polymeric dispersant.
Regarding claim 5, Poly(12-hydroxystearic acid) stearate with a molecular weight of about 750 g/mol has a backbone chain length of about 2.
Regarding claim 8, Herrlein, paragraph 288 of the PGPUB, teaches the dispersant can be a surfactant, an oligomer (e.g., example, oligomers have up to 20 monomeric units, polymers have at least 20 monomeric units), a polymer, or a mixture of several thereof, bearing at least one functional group with strong affinity for the surface of the pigment microparticles.
Regarding claim 9, Herrlein, paragraph 135 of the PGPUB, teaches the pigments can have a D50[vol] particle diameter of from 0.001 micron to 1 micron.
Regarding claim 14, the reference teaches RHODACAL ™ IPAM which is isopropyl amine dodecylbenzene sulfonate wherein the sulfonate is an anionic group.
Regarding claim 15, the reference teaches poly(12-hydroxystearic acid) stearate wherein this has an nonionic group.
Regarding claim 16, Herrlein, paragraph 117 of the PGPUB, teaches The medium of the hair coloring composition embodiments of the invention may be water alone, water in mixture with a volatile polar protic or aprotic organic solvent, or a non-aqueous solvent or a mixture of non-aqueous solvents with polar protic or aprotic polar organic solvent.
Claim 3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herrlein et al (US20200093730) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Lu (CN106074193).
Although the reference, paragraph 158 of the PGPUB, teaches the pigment(s) can be selected from the group consisting of metal oxides, hydroxides and oxide hydrates, mixed phase pigments, the reference does not teach the metal to be tungsten.
Lu teaches a deep coloured hair highlighting composition.
Adding pigment to the hair highlighting composition obtains a the final deep colour black or almost black, such as dark brown, dark gray, dark green, carmine, etc.
Lu teaches the pigment composition is a metal oxide pigment wherein the metal oxide pigment is selected from ferric oxide, ferric oxide, cobalt oxide or tungsten oxide.
It 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 to use tungsten as taught by Lu as the metal in the metal oxide or the metal in mixed phase pigments as Lu teaches adding pigment to the hair highlighting composition obtains a the final deep colour black or almost black, such as dark brown, dark gray, dark green, carmine, etc.
It 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 that a mixed phase tungsten oxide can be used (mixed valent tungsten oxide) as this is one possible pigment that can be used in hair dying.
Regarding claims 6-7, it 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 to incorporate dispersants in an amount to maximize the physically or chemically attach to the surface of the pigment microparticles.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 10-13 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 4, although the references teach a mixed valent tungsten oxide, the references do not teach cesium tungsten oxide or potassium tungsten oxide as claimed in claim 4.
There is no motivation in these references to use cesium tungsten oxide or potassium tungsten oxide as pigments as claimed in claim 4.
Regarding claims 10-11, although the references teach dispersants, the references do not teach an anchoring group of the first dispersant having a similar surface charge as an anchoring group of the second dispersant as claimed in claims 10-11.
There is no motivation in the references to have an anchoring group of the first dispersant have a similar surface charge as an anchoring group of the second dispersant as claimed in claims 10-11.
Regarding claims 12-13, although the references teach dispersants, the references do not teach the molecules of the second dispersant comprising a cationic anchoring group as claimed in claims 12-13.
There is no motivation in the references for molecules of the second dispersant comprising a cationic anchoring group as claimed in claims 12-13.
Although the references teach dispersants, the reference does not teach a quaternary ammonium salt as claimed in claim 17.
There is no motivation in the references to use a quaternary ammonium salt as a dispersant as claimed in claim 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20100261816 teaches non-aqueous pigment dispersion compositions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE J COHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5836. The examiner can normally be reached 10am- 6pm M-F.
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, Coris Fung can be reached at (571) 270-5713. 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.
/STEFANIE J COHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1732
Prosecution Insights