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 1-19 are presented for examination.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chang et al. (US 20210121382).
Regarding claim 15, Chang et al. teach a hair care composition comprising from about 8 to about 17% of one or more surfactants; from about 0.01% to about 10% of one or more surfactant soluble antidandruff agents; from about 0.01% to about 5% of one or more polyacrylate or polyacrylamide based thickening polymer. See Para [0004]. The use of acyl taurate is taught in Para [0047]. Chang teaches example of acyl taurates, which includes alkyl acyl taurates comprises sodium methyl cocoyl taurate, sodium methyl lauroyl taurate, sodium caproyl methyltaurate, sodium methyl oleoyl taurate, sodium cocoyl taurate, sodium lauroyl taurate, sodium caproyl taurate, and combination thereof. See Para [0056]. The use of water is taught in Para [0208]. The use of a cationic polymer is taught in Para [0080] and claims 43-47.
Regarding claim 16, Chang teaches the cationic cellulose polymer may have a cationic charge density of about 1.7 to about 2.1 meq/gm and a molecular weight of from about 1,000,000 to about 2,000,000. See Para [0147]. The charge density and molecular weight are within the scope of the claimed charge density and molecular weight.
Regarding claim 17, Chang teaches the use of co-surfactant such as, lauramidopropyl betaine, cocamidopropyl betaine and coco-betaine See Para [0059].
Regarding claim 18, Chang teaches the use of methyl substituted taurate, such as sodium methyl lauroyl taurate and sodium methyl oleoyl taurate. See Para [0056].
Regarding claim 19, the synergistic activity of the combination of acyl laurate and alkyl acyl laurate is the inherent property of the composition of Chang, which teaches all the claimed components in a personal care composition. The determination of synergism by different methods is considered to be within the skill of the artisan. Such measuring methods does not create a patentably distinct composition.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. (US 20210121382) in view of Trentini et al. (US 20200352838).
Claims 1-14 are drawn An aqueous personal care composition, comprising:
a) an acyl taurate surfactant and an N-alkyl acyl taurate surfactant at a weight ratio of
acyl taurate to N-alkyl acyl taurate of about 1:4 to about 50:1;
b) a co-surfactant; and
c) water, wherein the N-alky acyl taurate surfactant and the co-surfactant solubilize the
acyl taurate surfactant in the composition, and wherein the composition has a viscosity
of about 2000 mPa-s to about 20,000 mPa-s, according to the Rheology method.
Claim 15 is drawn to Aa personal care composition, comprising:
a) a surfactant system comprising an acyl taurate surfactant and an N-alkyl acyl taurate
surfactant;
b) a cationic polymer; and
c) water.
Regarding claim 1, Chang et al. teach a hair care composition comprising from about 8 to about 17% of one or more surfactants; from about 0.01% to about 10% of one or more surfactant soluble anti-dandruff agents; from about 0.01% to about 5% of one or more polyacrylate or polyacrylamide based thickening polymer. See Para [0004]. The use of acyl taurate is taught in Para [0047]. Chang teaches example of alkyl acyl taurate and acyl taurates can include sodium methyl cocoyl taurate, sodium methyl lauroyl taurate, sodium caproyl methyl taurate, sodium methyl oleoyl taurate, sodium cocoyl taurate, sodium lauroyl taurate, sodium caproyl taurate, and combination thereof. See Para [0056]. Therefore, Chang teaches that acyl taurate and alkyl acyl taurate can be used in combination. The use of a co-surfactant, such as betaine is taught in Para [0059]. The use of water is taught in Para [0208].
Chang does not teach the ratio of acyl taurate to alkyl acyl taurate and the viscosity of the claimed composition. However, Trentini teaches a personal care composition acyl taurate surfactant, and betaine surfactant. See Para [0015]. Trentini teaches that he personal cleansing compositions of the subject invention have or are adjusted to viscosities in the range of from 2500 cP to 10000 cP, depending upon the particular product form of the composition, and the desired thickness thereof. See Para [0058].
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art to arrive at the claimed viscosity motivated by the teachings of Trentini, which teaches a personal care cleansing composition having acyl taurates and betaine at a viscosity, within the scope of the claimed viscosity. The determination of the ratio of acyl taurate to alkyl acyl taurate, would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Applicant’s attention is drawn to In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955), wherein the court states “Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Chang does not teach the weight ratio of acyl taurate to N-alkyl acyl taurate. However, the determination of optimum proportions or amounts are considered to be within the skill of artisan in the absence of evidence to the contrary. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955),
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the synergistic activity of the combination of acyl laurate and alkyl acyl laurate is the property of the claimed composition. Since Chang teaches the claimed components in a personal care composition, such components in combination is expected to have synergistic activity in the absence of evidence to the contrary. The determination of synergism by different methods is considered to be within the skill of the artisan.
Regarding claims 6 and 7 Chang teaches the use of sodium cocoyl laurate and sodium lauroyl taurate are acyl surfactants having carbons in the R chain, which falls between C8-C24. See Para [0056].
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Chang teaches the use of methyl substituted taurate, such as sodium methyl lauroyl taurate and sodium methyl oleoyl taurate. See Para [0056].
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Chang teaches the use of co-surfactant such as, lauramidopropyl betaine, cocamidopropyl betaine and coco-betaine See Para [0059].
Regarding claim 12, Chang teaches the hair care composition may further comprise one or more optional ingredients, including benefit agents. Suitable benefit agents include, but are not limited to conditioning agents, cationic polymers, silicone emulsions, anti-dandruff agents, gel networks, chelating agents, and natural oils such as sun flower oil or castor oil. Additional suitable optional ingredients include but are not limited to perfumes, perfume microcapsules, colorants, particles, anti-microbials, foam busters, anti-static agents, rheology modifiers and thickeners, suspension materials and structures, pH adjusting agents and buffers, preservatives, pearlescent agents, solvents, diluents, anti-oxidants, vitamins and combinations thereof. The composition may have from about 0.5% to about 7% of a perfume. See Para [0191].
Regarding claim 13, Chang teaches Anti-dandruff agent may be one material or a mixture selected from the groups consisting of: azoles, such as climbazole, ketoconazole, itraconazole, econazole, and elubiol; hydroxy pyridones, such as octopirox (piroctone olamine), ciclopirox, rilopirox, and MEA-Hydroxyoctyloxypyridinone; kerolytic agents, such as salicylic acid and other hydroxy acids; strobilurins such as azoxystrobin and metal chelators such as 1,10-phenanthroline. See Para [0178].
Regarding claim 14, Chang does not teach the use of sulfate free surfactants. However, Trentini teaches a personal cleansing composition in particular, to water-based personal cleansing compositions including, for example, body washes, facial washes, and shampoos. See Para [0001]. The use of sulfate free surfactants is taught in Para [0011]. Trentini teaches the use of an acyl taurate and betaine in the personal care composition. See Para [0015]. Trentini teaches suitable acyl taurates include, for example, taurates commonly known as sodium methyl lauroyl taurate, potassium methyl lauroyl taurate, sodium methyl myristoyl taurate, potassium methyl myristoyl taurate, ammonium methyl myristoyl taurate, sodium methyl cocoyl taurate, potassium methyl cocoyl taurate, ammonium methyl cocoyl taurate, sodium methyl oleoyl taurate, potassium methyl oleoyl taurate, ammonium methyl oleoyl taurate, sodium lauroyl taurate, potassium lauroyl taurate, ammonium myristoyl taurate, sodium cocoyl taurate and potassium oleoyl taurate. The use of cocamidopropylbetaine is taught in Para [0049]. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art to use the sulfate free surfactants in the composition of Chang, motivated by the teachings of Trentini, which teaches the use of sulfate free surfactants in a personal care composition comprising the claimed acyl taurate and betaine as old and well known.
Regarding claim 15, Chang et al. teach a hair care composition comprising from about 8 to about 17% of one or more surfactants; from about 0.01% to about 10% of one or more surfactant soluble antidandruff agents; from about 0.01% to about 5% of one or more polyacrylate or polyacrylamide based thickening polymer. See Para [0004]. The use of acyl taurate is taught in Para [0047]. Chang teaches example of acyl taurates can include sodium methyl cocoyl taurate, sodium methyl lauroyl taurate, sodium caproyl methyltaurate, sodium methyl oleoyl taurate, sodium cocoyl taurate, sodium lauroyl taurate, sodium caproyl taurate, and combination thereof. See Para [0056]. The use of water is taught in Para [0208]. The use of a cationic polymer is taught in Para [0080] and claims 43-47.
Regarding claim 16, Chang teaches the cationic cellulose polymer may have a cationic charge density of about 1.7 to about 2.1 meq/gm and a molecular weight of from about 1,000,000 to about 2,000,000. See Para [0147].
Regarding claim 17, Chang teaches the use of co-surfactant such as, lauramidopropyl betaine, cocamidopropyl betaine and coco-betaine See Para [0059].
Regarding claim 18, Chang teaches the use of methyl substituted taurate, such as sodium methyl lauroyl taurate and sodium methyl oleoyl taurate and the combination thereof. See Para [0056].
Regarding claim 19, the synergistic activity of the combination of acyl laurate and alkyl acyl laurate is the inherent property of the claimed composition. Since Chang teaches the claimed components in a personal care composition, such components in combination are expected to have synergistic activity in the absence of evidence to the contrary. The determination of synergism by different methods is considered to be within the skill of the artisan.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZOHREH A FAY whose telephone number is (703)756-1800. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6:00.
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, Sue Liu can be reached at 571-272-5539. 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.
/ZOHREH A FAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1617
Prosecution Insights