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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Receipt is acknowledged of the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 07/23/2024. The Examiner has considered the reference cited therein to the extent that each is a proper citation. Please see attached USPO form.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 13 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. The recited claim states a solid cleaning composition in line 1 comprising of a water containing-liquid in line 5. It is unclear how a solid cleaning composition can comprise a water-containing liquid while still being solid. For the purpose of compact prosecution, claim 13 will be interpreted as a solid cleaning composition in powder or particulate form.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 12 and 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 12 recites that cleaning article from claim 1 has a cleaning efficiency when used with or without mechanical force. Claim 19 recites that the solid cleaning composition from claim 13 has a cleaning efficiency when used with or without mechanical force. Any cleaning article or composition necessarily has some cleaning efficiency and “with or without mechanical force” is not a limiting in either claim as is it specifies the intended use. Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims to place the claims in proper dependent form, rewrite the claims in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claims comply with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sivik et. al (US20200190446A1) hereinafter Sivik.
With regards to claims 1-11, 13-18, and 20 Sivik teaches a soluble fibrous structure encasing a solid particulate cleaning composition comprising divalent calcium salts (which includes anhydrous calcium sulfate), 15-60 wt% sodium bicarbonate (an example of a gas generator recited in the instant specification), acids such as citric acid, tartaric acid, or sulfamic acid, anti-blocking agents such as starch (an example of the hydrophobic anti-caking agent recited in the instant specification), and additional active ingredients such as perfumes, chelants, and surfactants (see [0163]); see also [0016]; see also [0185]; see also [0129]; see also [0130]). It is known in the art that anhydrous calcium sulfate reacts with water as a binder. Sivik teaches the composition of a soluble fibrous structure in Table 1 comprising 3.468 wt % water, 6.438 wt % sodium laureth-1-sulfate (a surfactant), 23.996 wt % citric acid anhydrous fizz particles, 12.890 wt % sodium bicarbonate, 11.106 wt % of zeolite and 0.486 wt % polyvinyl pyrrolidone (both binders), and 1.014 wt % perfume (see [0384]). Sivik also teaches the use of 5.45 wt % silica in the soluble fibrous structure formulation in Table 2 (see [0387]). Sivik teaches an average dissolution time range of the fibrous structure to be greater than 1 second and less than 24 hours according to the Dissolution Test Method (see [0320]). Sivik also teaches the pH of the fibrous element dissolved in water to be below 4 (see [0163)].
Sivik does not explicitly teach the functional limitation of an aged Shore A of at least 10, 30, or 50 or Shore D hardness of up to 100. The instant specification does recite examples of a particularly suitable reactive inorganic binders, including anhydrous calcium sulfate among others, expected to be within the Shore hardness A and D levels recited in the instant claims. Additionally, the examples of specific gas generators, hydrophobic anti-caking agents, and acids in the soluble fibrous cleaning article taught by Sivik are recited in the instant specification. Therefore, the Shore A hardness level of at least 50 and the Shore D hardness level of up to 100 would naturally flow from the teachings of Sivik. “Products of identical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure or compound, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2112.01 II. Hence, the Shore D and A hardness levels are inherently taught by Sivik, absent of evidence to the contrary.
With regards to claims 12 and 19, Sivik teaches a cleaning composition with a surfactant which necessarily has cleaning efficiency (see Abstract). Please note that the dependent claims 12 and 19 are intended use claims because the “with or without mechanical force” clause does not add any chemical or structural limitation to the composition. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHREYA PAUL whose telephone number is (571)272-1551. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30am-5:00pm.
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.
/SP/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/ANGELA C BROWN-PETTIGREW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1761