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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 10 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 10, the phrase “greater than about” is believed to be a mistake and only the actual ratio is intended in the claim. In claim 17, “1:25” is believed to be a mistake as well. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-7 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gizaw et al, US 2018/0100083 alone or in view of Emiru et al, US 2021/0009925.
Gizaw et al teach a liquid hard surface cleaner with a pH of from 7 to 12 (¶47 and 49) which is applied to a surface to be cleaned by spraying the composition onto the surface (¶76). The composition comprises a non-aqueous solvent which may include tripropylene glycol n-butyl ether (formula I), tripropylene glycol methyl ether (formula II) and mixtures thereof in amounts as high as 10% (¶41) and a surfactant system which may include up to 15% nonionic surfactants, including alkoxylated alcohols, APG 600 (C13-1.4), C12-14 dimethyl amine oxide, and mixtures thereof (¶51 and 56). Note that anionic surfactants are not preferred in these compositions (¶58), but the composition may include betaine surfactants (¶61). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to prepare a composition for spraying on a hard surface comprising tripropylene glycol methyl ether, tripropylene glycol n-butyl ether, APG 600 (C13-1.4), and C12-14 dimethyl amine oxide with confidence of forming an effective hard surface cleaner as these surfactants and solvents are all taught as preferred or suitable by the reference.
With respect to a spray dispenser, the fact that the reference teaches these compositions may be sprayed onto a surface immediately calls to mind standard sprayers to persons of skill in the art and consumers alike.
With respect to the ratio of solvents of formulas I and II, the reference does not mention specific ratios. As mixtures are contemplated by the reference, however, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use a mixture of solvents in roughly equal amounts and so a 1:1 ratio, which falls within the preferred ratio claimed. It is not an inventive leap to add two solvents at roughly equal amounts.
With respect to claims 3 and 5, amine oxide may be present in amounts as high as 2% (¶56) and the alkoxylated alcohol may be present in amounts as high as 10% (¶52), leaving 3% available for APG.
With respect to claim 20, ketone perfume raw materials are suitable optional ingredients of the invention (¶45).
With respect to the viscosity claimed, the reference teaches that the composition may comprise a thickener (emphasis added by the examiner). This means the thickener is an optional, not a required component. Note these compositions may comprise up to 99% water, and preferably up to 97% water (¶48). The examiner maintains a composition with 97% water will not be highly thickened, if it is thickened at all. There are good reasons, as pointed out by Gizaw et al, for adding a thickener to a hard surface cleaner. It allows the cleaner to cling to vertical surfaces for a longer period of time, and if that is the desire of the formulator, a thickener should be added. However, there are also good reasons to not add a thickener. A low viscosity hard surface cleaner can penetrate porous areas easier than a thickened cleaner, it spreads quicker and more evenly, and it evaporates and dries faster, resulting in reduced residue. All of these factors are known to persons of skill in the art, and so it is obvious to add a thickener to a hard surface cleaner, as taught by the reference. It is also obvious to not add a thickener, as the reference teaches the thickener is optional, and for the benefits discussed above. With all of that said, the reference does not specifically teach the viscosity range claimed.
Emiru et al teach a sprayable hard surface cleaner that may have a viscosity of from about 1 to about 500 cps (see claim 1). The reference is relied upon to demonstrate that a wide range of viscosities are contemplated by inventors for use in hard surface cleaners, according to the needs of the formulator, and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to formulate the hard surface cleaner of Gizaw et al with a low viscosity in order to achieve better penetration, quick spreading, and reduced residue upon drying.
Applicants have traversed Gizaw et al when it was a stand-alone reference on the grounds the reference contemplates a thickener and so it should not be used. This argument is addressed above.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gizaw et al, US 2018/0100083 alone or in view of Emiru et al, US 2021/0009925, and further in view of Locher et al, US 2023/0024364.
Gizaw et al and Emiru et al are relied upon as set forth above. Recall the reference teaches that these hard surface cleaners may contain betaine surfactants in combination with the APG and amine oxide, but the type of betaine is not specified.
Locher et al teach a hard surface cleaner (see abstract). An example of such a composition has a surfactant system comprising APG, lauryldimethyl amine oxide, and cocoamidopropyl betaine (¶119, example 4). The reference is relied upon to demonstrate that cocoamidopropyl betaine is a common surfactant to use in combination with APG and amine oxide to form an effective hard surface cleaner, and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use cocoamidopropyl betaine as the betaine in the Gizaw et al reference with confidence of forming an effective hard surface cleaner.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES I BOYER whose telephone number is (571)272-1311. The examiner can normally be reached M-S 10-430.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 5712722817. 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.
/CHARLES I BOYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights