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 .
Specification
The first line of the specification should be amended to recite that “This application is a 371 of PCT/US2022/047627, filed on October 25,2022, which claims benefit of Provisional SN 63/272,700, filed on October 28, 2021.”.
Claim Interpretation
The examiner construes the limitation “wherein the solid laundry drainage aid composition contains less than 3 wt% laundry actives” that is recited in independent claim 1 to mean that “the composition contains less than 3 wt% of detergent surfactants, detergent builders, bleaching agents, enzymes, and mixtures thereof”, as defined by applicant in paragraph 44 of the instant specification.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaschig et al, WO 03/089108, as evidenced by Colson et al, EP 1,075,864.
Kaschig et al, WO 03/089108, discloses a particulate foam control agent comprising 1-30 parts by weight of a silicone antifoam (i.e., a drainage aid component), 45-99 parts by weight of a particulate solid carrier for the antifoam, 2-50 parts by weight of a fluorescent whitening agent, and from 1-40 parts by weight of a binder (see abstract and page 1, line 31-page 2, line 1). It is further taught by Kaschig et al that the silicone antifoam contains a combination of a liquid organopolysiloxane of formula (1) and an organosilicon resin, as described in Colson et al, EP 1,075,864 (see page 2, line 6-page 4, line 2 of Kaschig et al, WO 03/089108), wherein Colson et al, EP 1,075,864, discloses in paragraph 18 that the organosilicon resin is present in an amount of 2-30% by weight based on the organopolysiloxane (i.e., resulting in a foam control agent that contains 70-98% by weight of an organopolysiloxane and 2-30% by weight of an organosilicon resin), that the particulate foam control agent contains 1-25% by weight of a filler particle, such as silica (see page 4, line 4-page 5, line 6), that suitable carriers include zeolites (see page 5, lines 8-27), that suitable binders include polyethylene glycol (see page 12, line 20-page 15, line 1), wherein the particulate foam control agent is combined in an amount of 0.02-5 parts by weight with a detergent composition in powder form that contains dyes and perfumes, and is used in a process to wash laundry in a washing machine according to European washing conditions that include a liquor ratio of 10-1 and 1-5 wash cycles, (see page 16, line 1-page 22, line 12), per the requirements of the instant invention. Specifically, note Examples 1-6.
Although Kaschig et al generally discloses a particulate foam control agent containing 70-98% by weight of an organopolysiloxane and 2-30% by weight of an organosilicon resin, the reference does not require such particulate foam control agents containing these components with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have formulated a particulate foam control agent, as taught by Kaschig et al, which contained 70-98% by weight of an organopolysiloxane and 2-30% by weight of an organosilicon resin, because such particulate foam control agents fall within the scope of those taught by Kaschig et al. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success, because such a particulate foam control agent containing 70-98% by weight of an organopolysiloxane and 2-30% by weight of an organosilicon resin is expressly suggested by the Kaschig et al disclosure and therefore is an obvious formulation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN P MRUK whose telephone number is (571)272-1321. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:00am-5:30pm Monday-Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Brown-Pettigrew, can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRIAN P MRUK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Brian P Mruk
March 24, 2026