Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/682,911

Topical Compositions and Formulations with Multifunctional Actions, Including Activity Against Parasites

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 10, 2024
Examiner
FUBARA, BLESSING M
Art Unit
1613
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
BIOSAFE S.A.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
786 granted / 1270 resolved
+1.9% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+34.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1308
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
36.3%
-3.7% vs TC avg
§102
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1270 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Receipt is acknowledged for preliminary amendments filed 02/10/2024 and 03/06/2024 and IDS filed 11/28/2025, 10/14/2024, 09/16/2024 and 09/13/2024. On 02/10/2024, claims 1 and 3-20 are amended. On 03/06/2024, claims 1-18 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending. Priority This application is a 371 of PCT/US22/40009 filed 08/10/2022 and which claims benefit of 63/231,717 filed 08/10/2021. Information Disclosure Statement The IDS filed 11/28/2025, 10/14/2024, 09/16/2024 and 09/13/2024 have been considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al., (US 20200405587 A1). Song discloses hair care composition in the form of shampoo (see the whole document with emphasis on paragraphs [0162], [0005], [0007], [0254]); the composition is a homogeneous, smooth and creamy (paragraph [0021]); the composition comprises one or more surfactants that are non-ionic surfactant and alkyl polyglucoside such as decyl glucoside/alkyl glucoside are identified as the non-ionic surfactant (paragraphs [0145], [0147]), and the nonionic alkyl glucoside or decyl glucoside is present from about 0 to about 25% or from about 0.1 to about 15% (paragraphs [0145]-[0150]) overlapping the claimed range of greater than 15% to less than 45%; filtered water/filtered deionized water (paragraph [0357]), optional ingredients present at from about 1 wt% to about 25 wt% or from about 3 wt% to about 20 wt% or from about 5 wt% to about 15 wt% plasticizer (paragraph [0236]) glycerin, propylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, polyesters, dimethicone copolyols (paragraphs [0236]-[0241]) with polyethylene glycol meeting the co-solvent; other suitable plasticizers are citric acid, salicylic acid (paragraph [0242]); humectants, moisturizers, conditioning agents, antimicrobial agents are other optional ingredients (paragraphs [0247], [0248]). The composition also contains chelants/chelating agent (paragraph [0068], [0069]) and EDTA have been used in the examples (see Tables 1-4), 0.46% in Example A and 0.50 in Example B, which reads on up to about 1%. A pH adjusting agent is present in the composition (paragraph [0271]) with the presence of citric acid and salicylic acid meeting the limitation of the pH adjusting agents. Polyquaternium, which meets the limitation of antimicrobial agent is used in examples A and B at 0.60%, 0.49% in example C and 0.51 in Example D. Thus for claims 1-4, 11, 16 and 17, the composition of Song comprising nonionic surfactant alkyl glucoside/decyl glucoside at less than or equal to 25% and meeting the limitation of alkyl glucoside of claims 1 and 16 and 17and solubilizing and clarifying agent of claims 11 and 16, filtered water, chelating agent EDTA at 0.5%, citric acid or salicylic acid pH adjusting agent, glycerin/humectant at 1 wt% or 3 wt%, polyethylene glycol meeting the limitation of co-solvent at 5-15 wt%, and antimicrobial agent at up to about 1% teaches the composition of claims 1-4 and 11. Song does not teach the exact amounts for the components of the composition. For example, the disclosed amount of the alkyl glucoside at from about 0 to about 25% or from about 0.1 to about 15% overlap the claimed range of greater than 15% and less than 45 % or greater than about 20% to up to 35 wt%. However, before the effective date of the invention, the ordinary skilled artisan, guided by the teachings of Song would use the components of the composition of Song in amounts that would lead to a composition that would be predictable as an effective hair and scalp shampoo. The optimization of the composition of Song falls within the findings in Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382, where it was determined that “the normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages.” It has been settled that, 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.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955), In re Hoeschele, 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969), see Merck & Co. Inc.v.Biocraft Lab. Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 809, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1848 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). The claims are directed to compositions. “For treatment against one or more parasitic insects …skin” is the intended use pf the composition. In the instant case the body of the claims define the invention the intended use defines the property inherent in the composition of Song. For claim 5, the composition of Song is capable of cleaning and conditioning one or more of hair, the intended use of the composition. For claim 6, the EDTA of Song meets the limitation of the claim. Claims 7 and 9 are composition claims. Applying the composition of Song to hair or skin would produce effect inherent to the composition of Song. Thus, for claim 7, the composition of Song is capable of the recited intended use which is inherent to the composition of Song. For claim 8, the polyethylene glycol of Song meets the requirement of the claim. For claim 10, the citric acid and salicylic acid of Song meet the pH balancing agents of the claim and the artisan would add amounts of the acid that would produce the desired pH. For claim 12, the composition further contains sodium methyl cocoyl taurate (paragraph [0142]), the requirement of the claim is met. For claim 13, EDTA of Song meets the claim. For claim 14, providing the composition to one or more of hair is the process of using the composition of claim 1. The shampoo composition of Song is capable of being applied to one or more of hair and skin. For claim 15, Song teaches filtered water which in Table 3 is QSd. Claim 18 is the intended use of the composition of claims 16 and 17 and the composition of Song is capable of the intended use. For claim 19, the composition of Song further comprises optional ingredients such as perfumes or fragrances or emollients and perfume broadly reads on essential oil. Therefore, Song renders claims 1-19 prima facie obvious. Claim(s) 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al., (US 20200405587 A1) in view of Chisholm et al., (US 20120317733 A1). Song has been described above to render claim 16 prima facie obvious. Claim 20 depends on claim 16. Song teaches its composition to comprise enzyme (paragraphs [0069], [0247]). In paragraph [0208], Song teaches that cationically modified starch may be incorporated into the composition in the form of hydrolyzed starch by acid, enzyme or alkaline degradation and oxidized starch from peroxide or peracid, hypochlorite, alkaline or any other oxidizing agent. Song differs from claim 20 by not teaching any of the enzymes of claim 20. However, Chisholm teaches treating hair with peracetic acid and catalase followed by treating with protease (paragraphs [0004], [0005]). Therefore, before the effective date of the invention, the artisan guided by the teachings of Song and Chisholm would use the specific enzyme of catalase and/or protease to predictably treat hair. Thus song in combination with Chisholm renders claim 20 prima facie obvious. Other Matters: Claim 6 has used “HEDTA” and “TEA-EDTA” without an initial designation of what “HEDTA” is and “TEA” is. It is suggested that HEDTA and TEA be initially defined and the “HEDTA” is and “TEA” could then be placed in parenthesis for further use without further defining what the abbreviations stand for No claim is allowed. The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLESSING M FUBARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0594. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am-6 pm (M-T). 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, Brian Yong Kwon can be reached at 5712720581. 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. /BLESSING M FUBARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1613
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 10, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599702
BONE REGENERATION MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576104
DENTAL PREPARATION COMPRISING FIBERS BASED ON HYALURONIC ACID WITH REGULATED BIODEGRADABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12551428
COSMETIC COMPOSITION COMPRISING ANIONIC AND AMPHOTERIC SURFACTANTS, CATIONIC POLYSACCHARIDES AND UNSATURATED FATTY ALCOHOLS, AND COSMETIC TREATMENT PROCESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12551601
HYDROPHILIC MEDICAL PRODUCTS AND HYDRATION MEDIUMS FOR HYDRATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12551409
PROCESS FOR MANUFACTURING A COMPRESSED PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+34.2%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1270 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month