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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-19 are pending. Note that, Applicant’s amendment and arguments filed July 6, 2026, have been entered.
Objections/Rejections Withdrawn
The following objections/rejections as set forth in the Office action mailed 4/6/26 have been withdrawn:
The objection to claims 14, 17, and 18 due to minor informalities has been withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 1-19 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inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention, has been withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 1-19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2016/118728, has been withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 1-19 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of copending Application No. 18/621222 (reference application); or claims 1-20 of 18/621236, has been withdrawn due to the filing of a terminal disclaimer.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 9, 12, and 16 are 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. With respect to instant claims 9, 12, and 16, these claims are dependent upon instant claim 1, wherein instant claim 1 recites “an alkyl chain that has a mol fraction of C12 and C13 chains of at least 90%”, “wherein the alkyl sulfated anionic surfactant comprises a mixture of linear and branched alkyl sulfated anionic surfactants”, and “about 15% to about 35% by weight of the surfactant system of a cosurfactant” (which equates to a lower limit of 0.75% of the cosurfactant based on the total weight of the composition); instant claims 9, 12, and 16 recite “wherein the alkyl sulfated anionic surfactant has an alkyl chain comprising an average of from 8 to 18 carbon atoms”, “wherein the alkyl sulfated anionic surfactant is linear”, and a lower limit of 0.1% for the cosurfactant, respectively, which do not further limit instant claim 1. 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.
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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2016/118728 in view of Sivik et al (US 2023/0045856).
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, ‘728 teaches a cleaning composition that includes, in one embodiment, an alkoxylated polyethylenimine in an amount of from 0.01 to 20 wt.%. The cleaning composition also includes lactic acid in an amount of from 0.1 to 20 wt.%. The cleaning composition further includes a surfactant actives component in an amount of at least 20 wt.%. The surfactant actives component includes an anionic surfactant. Each wt.% is based on a total weight of the cleaning composition. In further embodiments, the surfactant actives component of the cleaning composition consists essentially of an anionic surfactant in an amount of from 5 to 20 wt.%, a betaine in an amount of from 0.1 to 7 wt.%, and a nonionic surfactant in an amount of from 1 to 20 wt.% with the proviso that the total wt.% of the anionic surfactant, the betaine, and the nonionic surfactant is in an amount of at least 20 wt.%. See para. 10. The surfactants can be in various ratios relative to one another, provided that each of the surfactants are individually present within their respective ranges. The anionic surfactant can include or be any of the surfactants commonly classified as anionic surfactants. These surfactants can include the alkali metal, ammonium, and magnesium salts of the alpha olefin sulfonates, alkyl sulfonates, alkyl aryl sulfonates, alkyl aryl ether sulfates, alkyl sulfates, alkyl ether sulfates, sulfated alcohols, and sulfated alcohol ethoxylates, taurates, petroleum sulfonates, alkyl naphthalene sulfonates, alkyl sarcosinates, and the alkyl sulfosuccinates in which the alkyl group is a long chain 8 to 22, more typically 10 to 18, carbon atom group and the aryl group is typically phenyl or naphthyl. See para. 33. Typical anionic surfactants include sodium lauryl sulfonate, ammonium lauryl sulfonate, ammonium lauryl sulfate, dodecyl benzene sulfonate, linear alkylbenzene sulfonate (i.e., "LAS" or "LAS acid"), sodium lauryl sulfate (i.e., "SLS"), sodium laureth sulfate, sodium lauryl ether sulfate (i.e., "SLES"), sodium lauryl myristyl sulfate, diethanolamine lauryl sulfate, ammonium salts of sulfated alcohol ethoxylates, sodium cocoyl isethionate, sodium N-methyl-N-oleyl taurate, sodium N methyl-N-cocoyl taurate, triethanolamine lauryl sulfate, etc., and mixtures thereof. See para. 34. The anionic surfactant is typically present in the surfactant actives component of the cleaning composition in an amount of from 1 to 99, 1 to 35, 1 to 30, 1 to 25, 5 to 20, 8 to 17, or 10 to 15, wt.%, each based on a total weight of the cleaning composition, or any value or range of values therebetween. See para. 39.
Examples of suitable betaines can include alkyl betaines, alkylamidobetaine, amidazoliniumbetaine, sulfobetaine (INCI Sultaines) as well as the phosphobetaine, ricinoleamidopropyl betaine, cocamidopropyl betaine, oleyl betaine, stearyl betaine, cocoamidopropyl hydroxy sultaine, lauric myristic betaine, cocoamidosulfobetaine, alkylamidophospho betaine, algal oil betaine, and combinations thereof. In specific embodiments, the betaine comprises, consists essentially of, consists of, or is, a cocoamido alkyl betaine, such as a cocoamido propyl betaine. See para. 41. the betaine is typically present in the surfactant actives component of the cleaning composition in an amount of from 0.1 to 99, from 0.1 to 7, from 0.1 to 5, from 0.5 to 5, or from 1 to 3, wt.%, each based on a total weight of the cleaning composition, or any value or range of values there between. See para. 42. Suitable nonionic surfactants can include an alkyl polyglycoside (i.e., an "APG") such as APGs having the general formula II: R O(R O) (Z)a (II) wherein R is a generally monovalent organic radical having from 6 to 30 carbon atoms, R is generally a divalent alkylene radical having from 2 to 4 carbon atoms, Z is generally a saccharide residue having 5 or 6 carbon atoms, b is generally a number having a value of from 0 to 12, and a is generally a number having a value of from 1 to 6. Other types of APGs can also be utilized. See para. 46. Specifically, the cleaning composition typically has a pH of no greater than 4, of no greater than 3.5, or no greater than 3, or a pH of from 1 to 4, 2 to 4, 2.5 to 3.5, 2.8 to 3.5, 2.8 to 3.2, or 3. See para. 70.
‘728 does not teach the specific mixture of linear and branched C12/C13 alkyl sulfate surfactants or a composition having a pH less than about 5, the composition containing an anionic surfactant which is a specific mixture of linear and branched C12/C13 alkyl sulfate surfactants, a cosurfactant such as a betaine surfactant, lactic acid, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Sivik et al teach a liquid hand dishwashing detergent composition containing
cationic poly alpha-1 ,6-glucan ether compound, methods of making the liquid hand dishwashing detergent compositions, and methods of using said liquid hand dishwashing detergent compositions, which provide improved rinsing, solution feel, and finished product viscosity control. See Abstract. The liquid cleaning composition comprises from 5.0% to 50%, preferably from 6.0% to 40%, most preferably
from 15% to 35%, by weight of the total composition of a surfactant system. See para. 19. The surfactant system comprises an anionic surfactant. The surfactant system can comprise at least 50%, preferably from 60% to 90%, more preferably from 65% to
85% by weight of the surfactant system of the anionic surfactant. The surfactant system is preferably free of fatty acid or salt thereof, since such fatty acids impede the
generation of suds. Suitable anionic surfactants can be selected from the group consisting of: alkyl sulphate surfactant, alkyl sulphonate surfactant, alkyl sulphosuccinate and dialkyl sulphosuccinate ester surfactants, and mixtures thereof. The anionic surfactant can comprise at least 70%, preferably at least 85%, more preferably 100% by weight of the anionic surfactant of alkyl sulphate anionic surfactant. The alkyl chain of the alkyl sulphate anionic surfactant can have a mol fraction of C12 and C13 chains of at least 50%, preferably at least 65%, more preferably at least 80%, most preferably at least 90%. The alkyl sulphate anionic surfactant can have a weight average degree of branching of at least 10%, preferably from 20% to 60%, more preferably from 30% to 50%. See paras. 19-30.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the specific mixture of linear and branched C12/C13 alkyl sulfate surfactants as recited by the instant claims in the composition taught by ‘728, with a reasonable expectation of success, because Sivik et al teach the specific mixture of linear and branched C12/C13 alkyl sulfate surfactants as recited by the instant claims in a similar composition and further, ‘728 teaches the use of anionic surfactants and specifically, alkyl sulfate surfactants in general.
Nonetheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to formulate a composition having pH less than about 5, the composition containing the specific mixture of linear and branched C12/C13 alkyl sulfate surfactants, a cosurfactant such as a betaine surfactant, lactic acid, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of ‘728 in view of Sivik et al suggest a composition having pH less than about 5, the composition containing the specific mixture of linear and branched C12/C13 alkyl sulfate surfactants, a cosurfactant such as a betaine surfactant, lactic acid, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Response to Arguments
Note that, Applicant’s arguments are moot since the prior art rejection(s) set forth in the Office action mailed August 22, 2024, have been withdrawn and a new ground(s) of rejection has been made, as set forth above, which was necessitated by Applicant’s amendment. Sivik et al has been relied upon as secondary reference, as set forth above, for its teaching of the specific mixture of linear and branched C12/C13 alkyl sulfate surfactants as recited by the instant claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 GREGORY R DEL COTTO whose telephone number is (571)272-1312. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:00pm, EST.
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.
/GREGORY R DELCOTTO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/G.R.D/September 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights