Claims 1-17 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 .
2 This action is responsive to the applicant’s election with traverse received by the office on April 10, 2026. Election of claims 1-8 and 15-17 is acknowledged. Claims 9-14 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention. Therefore, claims 1-8 and 15-17 are pending in this application.
3 Applicant disagrees and pointed out that under rule 13.1, more than one invention is permitted if all inventors are so linked as to form a single general inventive concept.
The examiner respectfully, disagrees with the above argument because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of a soap composition of group I, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Bankar et al. (WO 2020169306 A1). Bankar et al. (WO’ 306 A1) teaches a soap bar comprising 40-60 wt.% TFM (total fatty matter), 21-40 wt.% water, 0.5-5 wt.% electrolyte and 0.1-10 wt.% sodium silicate (see the claims). Further, the soap composition made by group II, requires bicarbonate salt in the range of 0.5 to 5 wt.% and alkaline silicate in the range of 0.25 to 5 wt.% which is differ from the soap composition of group I. Therefore, the restriction is proper and maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4 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 2 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 2 recites the limitation “wherein free alkali content of said soap”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 does not recite a free alkali content of said soap. Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5 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.
6 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 1-8 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bangal et al. (WO 2019115435 A1) in view of Pujol et al. (EP 1859777 A2). English translation of the Patent EP 1859777 A2 is used in this Office action.
Bangal et al. (WO’ 435 A1) teaches a detergent composition comprising a moisture content in the amount of 10% to 45% which is covered the claimed percentage range as claimed in claims 1 and 15 (see page 5, lines 17-18) and wherein the detergent composition also comprises silica materials include gel silica in the amount of 0.5% wt., to 30% wt., which is overlapped with the claimed percentage range as claimed in claims 1 and 7 (see page 8, lines 25-29 and page 9, lines 4-6) and wherein the detergent composition also comprises Zeolite as claimed in claim 17 (see page 14, line 30) and wherein the detergent composition does not comprise acrylic/acrylate polymers as claimed in claim 1 and 16 (see the whole reference).
The instant claims differ from the teaching of Bangal et al. (WO’ 435 A1) by reciting a soap composition comprising fatty matter and electrolytes comprising sodium sulfate in the claimed amounts.
However, Bangal et al. (WO’ 435 A1) teaches a detergent composition comprising inorganic particulates (electrolytes) include sodium/potassium sulphate and sodium/potassium chloride (see page 14, lines 28-30).
Pujol et al. (EP’ 777 A2) in analogous art of soap formulation, teaches a soap composition comprising monocarboxylic acids (fatty matter) in the amounts of 25-50% by wt., which is overlapped with the claimed percentage range as claimed in claim 1 (see page 21, second paragraph, and claims 1-2) and a mixture of electrolytes include sodium sulfate and sodium chloride in the amounts of 0.5 to 10% by wt., which is overlapped with the claimed percentage ranges as claimed in claims 1 and 3-5 (see claim 1) and wherein the pH of the soap composition is 10 to 10.2 as claimed in claim 8 (see page 31, paragraph, 6) and wherein the soap composition does not comprise acrylic/acrylate polymers as claimed in claim 1 and 16 (see the whole reference).
Therefore, in view of the teaching of Pujol et al. (EP’ 777 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 Bangal et al. (WO’ 435 A1) by incorporating the electrolytes and fatty matter as taught by Pujol et al. (EP’ 777 A2) to arrive at the claimed subject matter. Such a modification would be obvious based on the teaching of Pujol et al. (EP’ 777 A2) that referred to the use of the electrolytes and fatty matter in the detergent composition to enhance the property of detergent composition such as wetting properties and must not irritate the skin (see page 19, paragraph, 5), and, thus, the person of the ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the detergent composition of Bangal et al. (WO’ 435 A1) by incorporating the electrolytes and fatty matter as taught by Pujol et al. (EP’ 777 A2) with a reasonable expectation of success for improving the property of the detergent composition and would expect such a detergent composition to have similar property to those claimed, absent unexpected results.
Regarding the limitations of claims 2 and 6, the combined references of Bangal et al. (WO’ 435 A1) and Pujol et al. (EP’ 777 A2) as described above, teach and disclose a detergent composition comprising fatty matter, electrolytes, silica gel and moisture as claimed, which is obviously should have similar free alkali content of the soap as well as similar iodine value as claimed in claims 2 and 6, and the person of the ordinary skill in the art would expect such a detergent composition to have similar property to those claimed, 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
Prosecution Insights