Claims 1-13 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2 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, 3 and 7-13 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.
Claims 1, 7, 9 and 10 provide the use of alkyloxy-substituted anthracene-9,10-dione but, since the claim does not set forth any steps involved in the method/process, it is unclear what method/process applicant is intending to encompass. A claim is indefinite where it merely recites a use without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced.
Claims 1, 7, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed recitation of a use, without setting forth any steps involved in the process, results in an improper definition of a process, i.e., results in a claim which is not a proper process claim under 35 U.S.C. 101. See for example Ex parte Dunki, 153 USPQ 678 (Bd.App. 1967) and Clinical Products, Ltd. v. Brenner, 255 F. Supp. 131, 149 USPQ 475 (D.D.C. 1966).
Claims 3, 8-9 and 11 recite the phrase “in particular”. The phrase “in particular” renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Correction is required.
Claims 10, 12 and 13 recite the limitation “the mixing of which is carried out”. It is unclear what is mean by this limitation?. Is it means that all the substituents being selected? Or mixtures thereof?. Also the phrase “carried out” is unclear. Clarification and/or correction are/is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3 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.
4 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 1-2, 4-5, 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)1 as being anticipated by Gardi et al. (WO 2006106049 A2)
Gardi et al. ((WO’ 049) teaches compounds having the following formulae (A-7), (A-8), (A-9) and (A-10):
PNG
media_image1.png
184
238
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
250
278
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
164
246
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
94
300
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Which are identical to the claimed formula (I), when in the claimed formula (I), R1 and R2 are independently linear or branched alkyl radical having 1 to 20 C atoms and X is H atom as claimed in claims 1, 2, 10 and 12 (see page 50, formula (A-7), page 51, formulae (A-8) and (A-9) and page 52, formula (A-10), wherein the compound having a formula (A-9) is a liquid compound and does not contain any bleaching agent as claimed in claims 4 and 5 (see page 52, lines 7-9). Gardi et al. ((WO’ 049) teaches all the limitations of the instant claims. Hence, Gardi et al. (Gardi) anticipates the claims.
5 Claims 1-2, 4-5, 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)1 as being anticipated by Willan et al. (J. Org. Chem. Vol. 46, 1981).
Willan et al. (J. Org. Chem. Vol. 46, 1981) teaches a compound alizarin dimethyl ether having the following formulae:
PNG
media_image5.png
170
184
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Which are identical to the claimed formula (I), when in the reference’s formula, R is H (formula 12a) or R is a methyl (Me) group (formula 12b), and when in the claimed formula (I), R1 and R2 are both hydrogen (H) atoms or R1 and R2 are both linear alkyl radicals having 1 C atom as claimed in claims 1-2, 10 and 12 (see page 1059, the formulae 12a and 12b), and wherein the compound alizarin dimethyl ether (anthraquinone or anthracene derivative) is prepared by recrystallization from acetone-ethanol, which inherently should be in a liquid form and does not comprise any bleaching agents as claimed in claims 4 and 5 (see page 1059, second paragraph under the formula 12a or 12b). Willan et al. (J. Org. Chem. Vol. 46, 1981) teaches all the limitations of the instant claims. Hence, Willan et al. (J. Org. Chem. Vol. 46, 1981) anticipates the claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
6 Claim 6 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. The prior art of record does not teach or disclose a washing agent comprising alkyloxy-substituted anthracene-9, 10-dione of the general formula (I) that present as a prefabricated dosage unit with a water-soluble coating as claimed in claim 6.
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