Claims 1-20 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.
Claim 12 is 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 12 provides the use of a packaged detergent 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.
Claim 12 is 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).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 10, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rees et al. (US 2015/0094251 A1).
Rees et al. (US’ 251 A1) teaches a gel cleaning composition in a packaged, wherein the gel composition comprising a primary surfactants include a highly ethoxylated alcohol ether (see abstract) and wherein the gel cleaning composition is contained in a water-soluble single use pouch package (see page 2, paragraph, 0033), and wherein the highly ethoxylated alcohol ether having the following formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
30
138
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wherein, R is an alkyl radical and “x” is about 20 to about 30, which is overlapped with the claimed range as claimed in claims 1 and 15 (see claims 1 and 20), and wherein the gel detergent composition also comprises a phosphate as a detergency builder (see page 4, paragraph, 0047) and wherein the gel detergent composition also comprises secondary surfactants include mixture of nonionic alcohol ethoxylate surfactants having a branched chain alkyl radical having 10 to 14 carbon atoms and 4 to about 12 ethylene oxide units and oleyl alcohol ethoxylates having about 4 to about 12 ethylene oxide units as claimed in claims 1 and 15 (see claims 1 and 29), wherein the gel detergent composition also does not comprise polyalkylene glycol as claimed in claim 1 and wherein the gel composition also comprises enzymes as claimed in claim 10 (see page 1, paragraph, 0010), wherein the gel detergent is used for cleaning soils from household surfaces as claimed in claim 12 (see page 1, paragraph, 0002).
The instant claims differ from the teaching of Rees et al. (US’ 251 A1) by reciting detergent gel composition comprising fatty alcohol ethoxylate having a formula in which “x” is an integer having a value of at least 25.
However, Rees et al. (US’ 251 A1) clearly teaches a gel detergent composition comprising fatty alcohol ethoxylates having a formula in which the ethoxylate radicals is range from 20 to about 30 (see claims 1 and 20) which is overlapped with the claimed range.
Therefore, in view of the teaching of Rees et al. (US’ 251 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 gel detergent composition of Rees et al. (US’ 251 A1) to arrive at the claimed invention. Such a modification would have been obvious based on the teaching of Rees et al. (US’ 251 A1) that clearly suggests the use of fatty alcohol ethoxylate with ethoxylate radicals in numbers that overlapped with the claimed numbers, and would expect such a gel detergent composition would have property similar to those claimed, absent unexpected results.
5 Claims 2-12 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rees et al. (US 2015/0094251 A1) in view of Lee et al. (EP 2970839 B1).
The disclosure of Rees et al. (US’ 251 A1), as described above, does not teach a package detergent gel composition, wherein the package is a water-soluble container film of poly(vinyl alcohol as claimed.
However, Rees et al. (US’ 251 A1) clearly teaches a gel cleaning composition contained in a water-soluble single use pouch package (see page 2, paragraph, 0033).
Lee et al. (EP’ 839 B1) in analogous art of packaged detergent formulation, teaches a water-soluble film commonly used to package household care compositions containing a laundry or with detergent as claimed in claims 2 and 12 (see page 2, paragraph, 0002), and wherein the water-soluble film based on poly(vinyl alcohol) as claimed in claims 3 and 16 (see page 2, paragraph, 0004), and wherein the water-soluble film is multi-compartment water-soluble pouch comprising a first compartment a second compartment and a third compartment and wherein the compartments includes first, second and third compositions selected from solid, liquid, liquid, solid, solid, liquid and liquid, liquid, liquid as claimed in claims 4-6 and 9 (see page 3, paragraphs, 0014-0017), and wherein the packaged composition comprises the components of unit dose packet as claimed in claim 11 (see page 2, paragraph, 0003), and wherein the package comprises bleach as claimed in claim 7 (see page 5, paragraph, 0032), wherein the composition is a detergent gels commonly used for laundry (see page 5, paragraph, 0033), and wherein the detergent composition does not comprise polyalkylene glycol in the claimed amounts as claimed in claims 8, 17 and 18. Lee et al. (EP’ 839 B1) also teaches a detergent composition comprising enzymes include amylase and protease added as prills (solid) as claimed in claims 10, 19 and 20 (see page 12, paragraph, 0103).
Therefore, in view of the teaching of Lee et al. (EP’ 839 B1), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the packaged of the water-soluble film of a multi-compartment water-soluble container as taught by Lee et al. (EP’ 839 B1) to the detergent gel composition of Rees et al. (US’ 251 A1) to arrive at the claimed invention, based on the teaching of Lee et al. (EP’ 839 B1) that refers to the water-soluble film that commonly used to package household care compositions containing a laundry or with detergent (see page 2, paragraph, 0002), and, thus, the person of the ordinary skill in the art would expect such a package detergent composition to have similar property to those claimed, absent of unexpected results.
Allowable Subject Matter
6 Claims 13 and 14 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. The closest prior art of record (US 2015/0094251 A1) does not teach or disclose a method for washing kitchenware in an automatic dishwashing machine wherein the packaged detergent gel composition added to the automatic dishwashing at the start of a main wash cycle or at the start of a pre-wash cycle as claimed. The prior art of record (US’ 251 A1) also does not teach a method for preparing a packaged detergent gel composition wherein the method comprises the claimed steps of mixing a liquid component with at least one fatty alcohol ethoxylate; cooling the composition formed to form a gel and adding the composition to a water-soluble container as claimed.
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