DETAILED ACTIONStatus of Application
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-24 are pending.
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 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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sauer et al. (US20190365868A1) hereinafter Sauer.
Regarding claims 1-24, Sauer is drawn to a method of treating a biofilm on a surface. A composition, comprising purified enzyme, within a particle, effective for reducing pyruvate concentration in an aqueous suspension of the composition (abstract).
Sauer discloses a method of treating and/or preventing dental plaque, dental carries in a subject by providing a pyruvate diminishing component which acts to reduce pyruvate in the oral cavity. The method involves treating the oral cavity of the subject with the pyruvate diminishing component. Treating can be carried out with a dentifrice, mouthwash, dental floss, gum, strip, toothpaste, a toothbrush, and other preparations, containing the stabilized pyruvate dehydrogenase. The composition may also contain other compounds known in the dental arts that are typically added to dental compositions. For example, the composition may also include fluoride and anti-caries agents [0497].
Sauer discloses the particle may comprise a nanoparticle. The particle may have a mean diameter of less than 1 micron. The particle may comprise a polymeric matrix, polymeric nanoparticle or chitosan. The particle may selectively bind to biofilms. The enzyme may be immobilized to a particle matrix, or encapsulated within a particle matrix, or within a liposome or vesicle. The particle may comprise a matrix or other material, with an affinity for pyruvic acid [0522]. Sauer discloses the following enzymes are known to adversely impact biofilms: NucB [0397]. Sauer discloses nanoparticles had an average size of 360±10 nm and a zeta-potential of −11±3 mV [0596]. Sauer discloses the administering may be carried out with a dentifrice, mouthwash, dental floss, gum, or gel [0525].
Sauer does not explicitly disclose each of the components of the composition in a single embodiment.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Sauer, to arrive at the instant invention.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Sauer discloses all the required components and Sauer discloses a method of treating and/or preventing dental plaque, dental carries in a subject [0497], wherein the particle may comprise a polymeric matrix, polymeric nanoparticle or chitosan. The particle may selectively bind to biofilms [0522]. Further, one having ordinary still in the art would reasonably expect success in combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, see MPEP 2141.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANGLONG N TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0719. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 am-5:00 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, Robert A Wax can be reached on 571-272-0623. 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.
/QUANGLONG N TRUONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1615