DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Claims 1, 2, and 3 are 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. Claims 4-6, and 8-21 depend on the above claims and, therefore, are also rejected.
With regards to claims 1, 2, and 3, a trademark cannot be used in a claim as a limitation or a means of identifying or describing a particular material or product. See MPEP 2173.05(u).
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.
Claim 11 is 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, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 11, which depends on claim 10 which defines the fragrance composition as a perfumed pet product, states that the composition can be used for several options such as cleaning product. Therefore, claim 11 does not further limit the limitations of claim 10. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 8-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lombardo et al (WO 2017214446).
With regards to claims 1-3, Lombardo teaches a fragrance compound (abstract) that is used for pet health and nutrition products (page 18) and that contains a fruity compound that includes benzaldehyde (page 15), a gourmand compound that includes ethyl vanillin, ethyl maltol and/or vanillin, a green compound that includes glabanolene, and a marine compound that includes ambrettolide (page 15 and pages 22-23).
With regards to claim 4, Lombardo teaches the amount of fragrance compound to be 0.001-99% by weight (page 15).
With regards to claim 5, Lombardo teaches the composition to further include a green compound such as methyl octine carbonate (page 15), a floral compound including phenyl ethyl alcohol (page 15) or lavender oil (page 15), and/or a balsamic compound that includes citronellol (page 15).
With regards to claim 6, Lombardo teaches the addition of other fragrances such as citrus compound that includes orange oil (page 15) and/or a citrus compound including citral (page 15).
With regards to claims 8, 10-13 and 15, Lombardo teaches a fragrance compound (abstract) that is used for pet health and nutrition products (page 18).
With regards to claim 9, Lombardo teaches the composition to be prepared by mixing the components (page 17).
With regards to claim 14, Lombardo teaches the composition to include the fragrance compound from about 1 to about 70% (page 15).
With regards to claims 16 and 17, Lombardo teaches the composition to be used for pet, such as cats and dogs, products (pages 17-18).
With regards to claims 18-21, Lombardo teaches the composition to include the fragrance compound to be present in an amount of 15 to 30% by weight (page 15).
Claims 1-4 and 8-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ho (US 2018/0271063).
With regards to claims 1-3, Ho teaches a dog toy that has a long-lasting scented body with durable fragrance (abstract) wherein the fragrance compound includes ethyl maltol or vanillin (0016).
With regards to claims 4, 14-15, and 18-21, Ho teaches the amount of flavor enhancer, that includes ethyl maltol or vanillin (0016) to be present in the amount of 4 parts in a composition having 139.8 parts (0024) reading on 2.9%.
With regards to claims 8, 10-13, and 16-17, Ho teaches the composition to be used on a dog toy (title).
With regards to claim 9, Ho teaches the flavor enhancer to be added to the rubber (0024-0031).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA WHITELEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5203. The examiner can normally be reached 8 - 5:00.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 5712721130. 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.
/JESSICA WHITELEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights