DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s Remarks filed February 27, 2026. No claims have been amended. Currently, claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
The text of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office action, Paper No. 20251213.
The rejection of claim 8 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, is withdrawn in view of applicant’s remarks.
The rejection of claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11 and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Denda et al, WO 2020/116411, is withdrawn in view of applicant’s remarks.
The rejection of claims 1-7, 10-11 and 13-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Brandt et al, US 2020/0375862, is withdrawn in view of applicant’s remarks.
The rejection of claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11 and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Herrwerth et al, US 2012/0015893, is withdrawn in view of applicant’s remarks.
The rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Herrwerth et al, US 2012/0015893, is maintained for the reasons of record
The provisional rejection of claims 1-20 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of copending Application No. 18/570,018 is maintained for the reasons of record.
NEW GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Susumu et al, JPH0995468.
Susumu et al, JPH0995468, discloses a sorbitol medium-chain fatty acid ester composition that contains 70-90% by weight of a mono-ester and 8-29% by weight of a di-ester, wherein the medium-chain fatty acid is a C8-10 carboxylic acid (i.e., inclusive of n-nonanoic ester; see abstract and paragraph 57). It is further taught by Susumu et al that the composition also contains tri-esters and tetra-esters (see paragraph 5), and that the resulting composition contains residual sorbitol (i.e., an anhydro sugar alcohol), and residual carboxylic acid (see Examples 1-2 in paragraphs 11-12), wherein the composition is used as kitchen/household detergent that further contains surfactants (see paragraph 9), per the requirements of the instant invention. Specifically, note Examples 1-3 and Table 1, which include the required steps of instant claim 9 to produce the sorbitol medium-chain fatty acid ester composition. Although Susumu et al is silent with respect to the hydroxyl number value, acid value and saponification value of their sorbitan carboxylic acid ester, the examiner asserts that the sorbitan carboxylic acid esters of Susumu et al would inherently meet the hydroxyl number value, acid value and saponification value requirements of the instant invention, since products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. Therefore, instant claims 1-20 are anticipated by Susumu et al, JPH0995468.
In the alternative that the above disclosure is insufficient to anticipate the above listed claims, it would have nonetheless been obvious to the skilled artisan to produce the claimed composition, as the reference teaches each of the claimed ingredients within the claimed proportions for the same utility.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 27, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The examiner notes that applicant did not provide remarks regarding the rejection of independent claim 9 in view of Herrwerth et al, US 2012/0015893. However, the examiner respectfully maintains that Herrwerth et al, US 2012/0015893, clearly discloses that the sorbitan carboxylic acid ester is made by the process of dehydrating sorbitol, reacting the dehydrated sorbitol with a carboxylic acid containing 6-10 carbon atoms, and isolating the resulting sorbitan ester (see paragraphs 76-77 and 125), per the requirements of instant claim 9.
With regard to the provisional rejection of claims 1-20 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of copending Application No. 18/570,018, applicant argues that the copending application fails to claim a composition comprising an anhydro sugar alcohol. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Specifically, the examiner asserts that the similar process of making the mixture of n-nonanoic esters of xylitol and sorbitol claimed in copending Application No. 18/570,018 would result in the composition containing residual xylitol and/or sorbitol, as required in the instant claims. Accordingly, the examiner asserts that the obviousness-type double patenting rejection over copending Application No. 18/570,018 will be held in abeyance until an indication of allowable subject matter in the instant application is identified.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on February 27, 2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN P MRUK whose telephone number is (571)272-1321. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:00am-5:30pm Monday-Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Brown-Pettigrew, can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRIAN P MRUK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Brian P Mruk
April 1, 2026