DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1-12 are currently pending.
Election/Restrictions
3. Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-3, 7, and 11 in the reply filed on May 26, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Groups I and III do not lack unity because the linking technical feature between these two groups is fennel and chamomile which has not been established as lacking a special technical feature. This is not found persuasive because this linking technical feature is also not considered to be a special technical feature because it was known in the art as demonstrated by the references cited in the art rejections below.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
4. Claims 4-6, 8, 9, and 12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
5. Claims 1-3, 7, and 11 are examined on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 and 11 are rejected 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.
6. Claim 3 is indefinite due to the use of the term “suitably.” It is unclear how to determine what is encompassed by a “suitable” administration. Clarification is needed.
7. Claim 11 is indefinite because there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the product” as recited in lines 3 and 6 of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
8. Claim(s) 1-3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sah (International Journal of Green and Herbal Chemistry (May 2020), vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 191-202).
This reference teaches a method for treating menstrual disorders and premenstrual syndrome by administering a composition comprising fennel extract and chamomile extract. The composition is administered in a daily dose of 0.2g, 0.4g, or 0.6 g of chamomile and 0.3g of fennel (see page 192, 194, and Table 1).
9. Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fletcher (US 6,280,751).
This reference teaches a method for treating premenstrual syndrome by administering a composition comprising fennel oil and chamomile oil (see Table at columns 23-24).
10. Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 20205010477 U1 (English translation).
This reference teaches a method for treating menstrual symptoms by administering a composition comprising fennel and chamomile extracts prior to the beginning of menstruation (see page 1 of the translation).
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.
11. Claim(s) 1 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sah (International Journal of Green and Herbal Chemistry (May 2020), vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 191-202).
The teachings of Sah are discussed above in paragraph 8. While the reference teaches administering the composition orally, the reference does not specifically teach formulating the composition as a confectionary product. However, confectionary products are well known formulations for oral pharmaceutical products. An artisan of ordinary skill would be motivated to employ this well known type of formulation when administering the product taught by Sah. Thus, claim 7 is considered to be an obvious modification of what was known in the art prior to the effective filing date.
12. No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Susan Hoffman whose telephone number is (571)272-0963. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Anand Desai can be reached at 571-272-0947. 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.
/SUSAN HOFFMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1655
Prosecution Insights