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 .
Summary
Claims 1 - 20 are pending in this office action; all pending claims are under examination in this application.
Priority
The current application filed on April 6, 2024 is a 371 of PCT/EP2022/085433 filed December 12, 2022, which in turn claims priority to French patent applications FR 2210879, filed on October 20, 2022 and FR 2113849 filed on December 17, 2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
Receipt of the Information Disclosure Statement filed on June 8, 2024 is acknowledged. A signed copy of the PTO/SB/08a is attached to this office action.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: the structure of the merocyanine compound is shaded which makes is more difficult to read and will most likely impede publication. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 4, and 15 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.
Claim 1, part b recites, “solvates thereof such as hydrates”. It is unclear whether the claim is to be limited to hydrates or cam have other solvates; this renders the claim indefinite.
Claims 4 and 15 contain tables. Claims may contain tables either if necessary to conform to 35 U.S.C. 112 or if otherwise found to be desirable. See MPEP 2173.05(s). When such a patent is printed, however, the table will not be included as part of the claim, and instead the claim will contain a reference to the table number. Where possible, claims are to be complete in themselves. Incorporation by reference to a specific figure or table "is permitted only in exceptional circumstances where there is no practical way to define the invention in words and where it is more concise to incorporate by reference than duplicating a drawing or table into the claim. Incorporation by reference is a necessity doctrine, not for applicant' s convenience.” Ex parte Fressola, 27USPQ2d 1608, 1609 (Bd, Pat. App. & Inter. 1993) (citations omitted). In the instant case, there is a more practical way to define the invention without the use of a table.
This rejection may be obviated by depicting the structures in a non-tabular form.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Batista et al. WO 2019002495 in view of Richard et al. US 20100183529.
Batista et al. teach photoprotective compositions comprising a dibenzoylmethane derivative and a merocyanine compound. The merocyanines of Richard et al. '495 are the same merocyanine compounds claimed in the instant application.
Richard et al. teach cosmetic compositions comprising photostabilized dibenzoylmethane compounds and 2-pyrrolidinone-4- carboxy esters
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the instant effective filing date, to use both the merocyanine compounds of Batista et al. together with the 2-pyrrolidinone-4- carboxy esters of Richard et al. to stabilize sunscreen compositions comprising dibenzoylmethanes with the expectation that the dibenzoylmethanes would be stable and the sunscreen work more effectively. Proof that this is analogous art is found in the instant specification which discusses that other sunscreen agents may be present – specifically, paragraph 120 mentions dibenzoylmethane compounds.
With regard to claims 2 and 3, Batista et al. teach the amount of merocyanine is between 0.2 and 10% by weight of the composition, see claim 7. Richard et al. teach amounts of the pyrrolidinone compound to be 0.01-20%, or, more preferably, 0.1-10% of the total composition, see paragraph [0034]. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to use similar amounts in the combination composition comprising both merocyanine and pyrrolidinone compounds with the expectation of beneficial results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mudrak teaches a variety of 2-+pyrrolidone compounds potentially useful for the present invention.
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert A. Wax whose telephone number is (571)272-0623. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM -4:00 PM Monday - Friday.
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, Jennifer Michener can be reached at (571) 272-1424. 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.
/Robert A Wax/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1615