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 1-18 are pending. Note that, Applicant’s response filed June 2, 2026, has been entered.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-15, in the reply filed on June 2, 2026, is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Examiner’s assertions that unity of invention is lacking since the technical feature which links Groups I-III, a solid cleansing composition, does not make a contribution over prior art, is not persuasive due to a lack of articulated reasoning. This is not found persuasive because the technical feature linking Groups I-III, a solid cleansing composition, does not make a contribution over the prior art for the reasons as set forth below.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 16-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on June 2, 2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
With respect to instant claim 11, line 6, it is suggested that Applicant delete “(such as probiotics)”.
With respect to instant claim 11, line 6, it is suggested that Applicant delete “and” and insert “or”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/181099.
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, ‘099 teaches a solid cleansing
composition comprising: (i) at least one acyl alkyl isethionate surfactant of the formula (I), (ii) a salt of carbonic acid; and (iii) an organic acid. See page 2, lines 10-25. The solid cleansing composition of the first aspect may be in a compacted, crystalline or
powdered form. Suitable compacted forms include bars, blocks, pucks, and sticks, and maybe formed by compressing an admixture of the components of the composition. See page 6, lines 10-30.
The solid cleansing composition of the first aspect may comprise at least one additional ingredient. By additional ingredient, we mean a component of the composition other than the acyl alkyl isethionate surfactant of the formula (I), the salt of carbonic acid, and the organic acid. Suitably, the composition comprises from 0.001 to 25 wt% of the at least one additional ingredient, such as from 0.01 to 25 wt%, for example from 0.1 to 25 wt%, of the at least one additional ingredient. In some embodiments the additional ingredient comprises one or more further surfactants in addition to the acyl alkyl isethionate surfactant of the formula (I). Suitably, the solid cleansing composition of the first aspect of the invention comprises from 0.01 to 25 wt%, such as from 1to 10 wt%, of an additional surfactant. The additional surfactants may be selected from one or more anionic surfactants, cationic surfactants, non-ionic surfactants and amphoteric surfactants. Additional anionic surfactants include alkyl sulfates, alkyl ether sulfates, acyl taurates, sodium laureth sulfate, sodium lauryl sulfate, etc., and mixtures thereof. See page 11, lines 5-25. Suitable nonionic surfactants include alkyl polyglycosides, etc. See pages 11 and 12. Suitable amphoteric surfactants include betaines such as cocamidopropylbetaine, laurylamidopropl betaine, etc. See pages 15-18.
The solid cleansing composition of the first aspect may comprise a chelating agent as an additional ingredient. Suitable chelating agents include ethylenediamine-N,N'-disuccinic acid, methylglycinediacetic acid, glutamic acid N,N-diacetic acid, imino disuccinic acid, diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid, ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid, diethylenetriamine pentamethylene phosphonic acid, etidronic acid and anions and mixtures thereof. See page 18. Fillers may be used and suitable fillers include talc, starch, and maltodextrin. See page 22, lines 20-25. ‘099 exemplify compositions containing sodium lauroyl methyl taurate. See page 25. Note that, instant claims 3 and 13 are product by process claims; the Examiner asserts that the broad teachings of ‘099 would suggest compositions having the same properties as recited by the instant claims because ‘099 teaches compositions containing the same components in the same amounts as recited by the instant claims. Note that, even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior art product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Additionally, once the Examiner provides a rationale tending to show that the claimed product appears to be the same or similar to that of the prior art, although by a different process, the burden shifts to Applicant to come forward with evidence establishing an unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art product. In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 798, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir. 1983). See MPEP 2113.
‘099 does not teach, with sufficient specificity, a solid composition containing a hydrocarbyl sulfate, an acyl taurate and/or betaine, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
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 solid composition containing a hydrocarbyl sulfate, an acyl taurate and/or betaine, 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 ‘099 suggest a solid composition containing a hydrocarbyl sulfate, an acyl taurate and/or betaine, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Remaining references cited but not relied upon are considered to be cumulative to or less pertinent than those relied upon or discussed above.
Applicant is reminded that any evidence to be presented in accordance with 37 CFR 1.131 or 1.132 should be submitted before final rejection in order to be considered timely.
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/June 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights