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 .
Restriction Election
Applicant’s election of Group II, claims 8-14, in the reply filed on 7/14/26 is
acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
The instant claims 1-7 and 15-26 are withdrawn from further consideration as being directed to non-elected inventions.
Rejections
2. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
3. Claims 8 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The moiety having the subscript e of claim 8 does not contain an oxygen atom as is required by this moiety throughout the instant specification. The instant specification does not disclose the claimed compound with no oxygen atom. It is taken that the absence of the oxygen atom is a typographical error.
4. The instant claim 10 is objected to as depending from the above rejected claim 8 though it is noted that the moiety with subscript e has the oxygen in this claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yousr Skhiri et al., “Dynamics of Molecular Transport by Surfactants in Emulsions”, Soft Matter, Vol. 8, No. 41, 1 January 2012, Pages 10618-10627.
Yousr, page 10619, Fig. 1, particularly Fig. 1(a) under “Surfactant characterization”, falls within the scope of the instantly claimed surfactant of the instant claims 8-14, noting the values of the subscripts in the description of Fig. 1. This surfactant falls within the scope of the instant claims 8-14. The instant claims 8-14 do not require any further ingredients than the surfactant. The disclosed surfactant is therefore the claimed composition. The surfactants are those of the instant claims and therefore necessarily and inherently have the properties of the instant claims. See MPEP 2112.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK D NILAND whose telephone number is (571)272-1121. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 10 to 5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert S Jones, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-7733. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/PATRICK D NILAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762
Prosecution Insights