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 .
Claims 1-6 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/25/2024 and 12/31/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: Change “the active ingredient is a pyrethroid compound, which is at least one selected from” to “the active ingredient is the pyrethroid compound selected from”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Change “the active ingredient is a phenylpyrazole compound, fipronil” to “the active ingredient is the phenylpyrazole compound fipronil”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Yoshioka (WO 2020/217287; published October 29, 2020) in view of Vadar (WO 98/22282; international filing date November 20, 1997).
Applicant claims a pest-controlling tool comprising and agent containing an active compound selected from a pyrethroid, a phenylpyrazole and a macrolide and at least one solvent selected from diethylene glycol, monoethyl ether, benzyl alcohol, ethyl lactate and a medium-chain fatty acid triglycerides and a container in which the agent is held comprising a first olefin resin layer, and alicyclic olefin resin layer, a second olefin resin layer and a polyethylene terephthalate layer or ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer layer, wherein the first olefin layer is facing the agent.
Yoshioka teaches a chemical agent selected from a pyrethroid, a phenylpyrazole and a macrolide and at least one solvent selected from diethylene glycol, monoethyl ether, benzyl alcohol, ethyl lactate and a medium-chain fatty acid triglycerides housed in a container formed from at least one resin selected from alicyclic olefinic resin, polyethylene terephthalate, polyacrylonitrile, polyethylene naphthalate and polypropylene (abstract). The container may further comprise a lid portion that covers an opening of the container body [0031]. The alicyclic olefin resin is preferably selected from norbornane ethylene copolymers and in addition an olefin resin comprising polyethylene and polypropylene may be selected [0033]. The phenylpyrazole compound is fipronil and the pyrethroids are selected from synthetic pyrethroids which encompass ethofenprox, phenothrin and allethrin [0014-16].
Yoshioka et al. do not teach the container comprises a laminate comprising layers of a first olefin resin layer, and alicyclic olefin resin layer, a second olefin resin layer and a polyethylene terephthalate layer or ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer layer, however mixtures of the polymers are taught to be used to form the container. It is for this reason that Vadhar is joined.
Vadhar teach sealed articles comprising a multilayer film having a first inside layer comprising olefin polymer, a second olefin layer, a third olefin layer and a fourth layer comprising ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (abstract). The multilayer films have toughness, are impact resistant and provide an O2-barrier layer which increases shelf life (page 2, lines 17-29). The articles are designed to package flowable pesticides (page 5, lines 25-26). Polyolefins include cyclic olefins (page 12, lines 19-20).
Both Yoshioka and Vadhar teach polymer containers comprising pesticide formulations. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to combine the teachings of Yoshioka and Vadhar and form the containers from a laminate comprising a first inside layer comprising olefin polymer, a second olefin layer, a third olefin layer and a fourth layer comprising ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Yoshioka and Vadhar to form a multilayer laminates comprising olefins and ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymers before the time of filing because Vadhar teach that multilayer films comprising olefin layers have toughness, are impact resistant and provide an O2-barrier layer which increases shelf life.
Claims 1, 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wurtz et al. (US 2006/001666; published January 19, 2006) in view of Vadar (WO 98/22282; international filing date November 20, 1997).
Applicant claims a pest-controlling tool comprising and agent containing an active compound selected from a pyrethroid, a phenylpyrazole and a macrolide and at least one solvent selected from diethylene glycol, monoethyl ether, benzyl alcohol, ethyl lactate and a medium-chain fatty acid triglycerides and a container in which the agent is held comprising a first olefic resin layer, and alicyclic olefin resin layer, a second olefin resin layer and a polyethylene terephthalate layer or ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer layer, wherein the first olefin layer is facing the agent.
Wurtz et al. teach liquid agent applicator that is sealed by a breakable seal which can be opened by twisting (a lid) (abstract). The apparatus is used for dispensing liquid agents to the skin of an animula to treat or prevent parasite infestation [0003]. The plastic pipette comprises a break away tip and are comprised of flexible materials selected from polypropylenes, polyolefins and aluminum foils and rigid materials selected from polyethylene terephthalate and cycloolefin copolymers (alicyclic olefins) [0005]. Agents used in the applicators include macrolides [0315-317] and phenylpyrazoles [0338]. Frontline, a spot-on product comprising fipronil and other solvents including diethylene glycol monoethyl ether is also preferred [0357, 0398]. Other solvents include benzyl alcohol and glyceride/triglyceride [0404].
Wurtz et al. teach the container is comprised of polyolefins, polyethylene terephthalate and cycloolefin copolymers (alicyclic olefins) but do not teach the container comprises a laminate comprising layers of a first olefin resin layer, and alicyclic olefin resin layer, a second olefin resin layer and a polyethylene terephthalate layer or ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer layer, however mixtures of the polymers are taught to be used to form the container. It is for this reason that Vadhar is joined.
Vadhar teach sealed articles comprising a multilayer film having a first inside layer comprising olefin polymer, a second olefin layer, a third olefin layer and a fourth layer comprising ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (abstract). The multilayer films have toughness, are impact resistant and provide an O2-barrier layer which increases shelf life (page 2, lines 17-29). The articles are designed to package flowable pesticides (page 5, lines 25-26). Polyolefins include cyclic olefins, polypropylene homopolymers and polyethylene homopolymers (page 12, lines 19-20).
Both Wurtz et al. and Vadhar teach polymer containers comprising pesticide formulations. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to combine the teachings of Wurtz et al. and Vadhar and form the containers from a laminate comprising a first inside layer comprising olefin polymer, a second olefin layer, a third olefin layer and a fourth layer comprising ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Wurtz et al. and Vadhar before the time of filing because Vadhar teach that multilayer films comprising olefin layers have toughness, are impact resistant and provide an O2-barrier layer which increases shelf life.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wurtz et al. (US 2006/001666; published January 19, 2006) in view of Vadar (WO 98/22282; international filing date November 20, 1997), as applied to claims 1, 2 and 6 in further view of Nouvel (US 2011/0071193; published March 24, 2011).
Applicant claims a pest-controlling tool comprising and agent containing an active compound selected from a pyrethroid, a phenylpyrazole and a macrolide and at least one solvent selected from diethylene glycol, monoethyl ether, benzyl alcohol, ethyl lactate and a medium-chain fatty acid triglycerides and a container in which the agent is held comprising a first olefin resin layer, and alicyclic olefin resin layer, a second olefin resin layer and a polyethylene terephthalate layer or ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer layer, wherein the first olefin layer is facing the agent.
The teachings of Wurtz et al. and Vadhar are addressed in the above 103 rejection.
Wurtz et al. teach including pesticides in the spot-on treatment containers, however pyrethroids, specifically etofenprox is not taught. It is for this reason that Nouvel is joined.
Nouvel teach spot-on pesticide compositions comprising fipronil and a pyrethroid (abstract). Fipronil and pyrethroids (which encompass phenothrin, allethrin and etofenprox) cause hyperexcitation which aids in paralyzing the pests and etofenprox is preferred as the pyrethroid compound [0017-18, 0040]. The preferred formulations comprises fipronil, ethofenprox and diethylene glycol monoethyl ether (Example 3)
Both Wurtz et al. and Nouvel teach spot-on formulations comprising fipronil. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to combine the teachings of Wurtz et al., Vadhar and Nouvel and include pyrethroids, specifically ethofenprox with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Wurtz et al., Vadhar and Nouvel before the time of filing because Nouvel teach combining fipronil with ethofenprox to form spot-on formulations that aid in paralyzing pests.
Claim 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wurtz et al. (US 2006/001666; published January 19, 2006) in view of Vadar (WO 98/22282; international filing date November 20, 1997), as applied to claims 1, 2 and 6 in further view of Hausmann (WO 2013/116445; published August 8, 2013).
Applicant claims a pest-controlling tool comprising and agent containing an active compound selected from a pyrethroid, a phenylpyrazole and a macrolide and at least one solvent selected from diethylene glycol, monoethyl ether, benzyl alcohol, ethyl lactate and a medium-chain fatty acid triglycerides and a container in which the agent is held comprising a first olefin resin layer, and alicyclic olefin resin layer, a second olefin resin layer and a polyethylene terephthalate layer or ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer layer, wherein the first olefin layer is facing the agent.
The teachings of Wurtz et al. and Vadhar are addressed in the above 103 rejection.
Wurtz et al. and Vadhar teach spot-on treatments contained in laminated containers comprising polyolefins, polypropylene homopolymers, polyethylene homopolymers and polyethylene terephthalate but do not specify the alicyclic olefin resin is a copolymer of norbornene and ethylene or that the olefin resin layer is a copolymer of polyethylene and polypropylene. It is for this reason that Hausmann is joined.
Hausmann et al. teach multilayer film structure that is puncture resistant comprising cyclic olefin copolymers used in packaging (abstract). Typical cyclic monomers are selected from norbornenes and alpha-olefins are selected from ethylene and propylene (page 5, lines 20-31). Copolymers of ethylene and norbornene (COC) are preferred (page 6, lines 7-9). Additional puncture resistant layers comprise polyolefins chosen from polyethylene and polypropylene copolymers and homopolymers and mixtures thereof (page 7, lines 25-28).
Wurtz et al., Vadhar and Hausmann et al. teach polymer containers comprising polyolefins. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to combine the teachings of Wurtz et al., Vadhar and Hausmann et al. and include copolymers of norbornene and ethylene and copolymers of polyethylene and polypropylene with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Wurtz et al., Vadhar and Hausmann et al. to include copolymers of norbornene and ethylene before the time of filing because Hausmann et al. teach copolymers of norbornene and ethylene are preferred cyclic olefins used to make puncture resistant containers. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Wurtz et al., Vadhar and Hausmann et al. to include copolymers of polyethylene and polypropylene before the time of filing because Hausmann et al. teach polyolefins copolymers of polyethylene and polypropylene provide puncture resistant layers which would aid in making stable containers.
Conclusion
No claims allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE D JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3285. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:30 pm.
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, Bethany Barham can be reached at 571-272-6175. 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.
DANIELLE D. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 1617
/BETHANY P BARHAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1611