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 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.
Claim(s) 1-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mainini et al. (US 2014/0048017) which in figures 5-10 disclose the following claimed invention:
PNG
media_image1.png
458
682
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In re claim 1: A method for administering a formulation (gel) to an animal (dog), the method comprising: providing a dispenser 101 containing the formulation 107, the dispenser 101 comprising: a top end 109 comprising one or more openings 106; and a bottom end 102 comprising a tightening mechanism 108; contacting a formulation application area with the top end 109; and administering the formulation 107 by adjusting the tightening mechanism 108to push the formulation 107 through the one or more openings 106 and into contact with the formulation application area, wherein, during the administering step, the animal (dog) licks the formulation from the top end 109 (see fig.5 above), the licking motion topically applies the formulation to gums of the animal (dog), and the formulation 107 adheres to the gums to provide transmucosal administration of at least one ingredient of the formulation 107 (see [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 2: the one or more openings 106 include a plurality of openings 106 (see figures 5-10 of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 3: the formulation application area includes a mouth of the animal (see fig. 5 above and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 4: the mouth includes an oral cavity, teeth, or gums of the animal (see fig. 5 above and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 5: the formulation 107 is configured to be ingested by the animal (dog), thereby providing a dual application of the formulation 107 (see fig. 5 above and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 6: the formulation 107 comprises a gel 107 (see [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 7: gel 107 has a viscosity configured to pass through the one or more openings 106 (see [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 8: adjusting the tightening mechanism 108 comprises twisting a grip 108 to turn the tightening mechanism 108 (see figs, 9-10 and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 9: the grip (surface of 108) has a plurality of rotational positions 120 (see figs, 9-10 and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 10: each rotational position 120 of the plurality of rotational positions 120 corresponds to a dose of the formulation 107 administered through the one or more openings 106 (see figs, 9-10 and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 11: selecting the dose of the formulation 107 based on at least a size of the animal (dog) prior to administering the formulation 107 (see figs, 9-10 and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 12: administering the formulation 107comprises rotating the grip 108 to a rotational position 120 of the plurality of rotational positions 120, wherein the rotational position 120 corresponds to the dose (see figs, 9-10 and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 13: A method for administering a formulation 107 to an animal (dog), the method comprising: providing a dispenser 101 containing the formulation 107, the dispenser 101 comprising: a top end 109 comprising one or more openings 106; and a bottom end 102 comprising a grip 108 coupled to a tightening mechanism 110/11; selecting a dose 120/122 of the formulation 107 based on at least a size of the animal (dog); contacting a formulation application area (see fig.5 above) with the top end 109; and turning the grip 108 to a rotational position corresponding to the dose 120/121, wherein turning the grip 108 to the rotational position causes the tightening mechanism 110/111 to push the dose of the formulation 107 through the one or more openings 106 and into contact with the formulation application area, thereby administering the dose of the formulation 107 (see [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 14: the rotational position 121/122 comprises a plurality of rotational positions (see figs, 9-10 and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 15: each rotational position 121/122 of the plurality of rotational positions corresponds to a different dose (see figs, 9-10 and [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 17: the formulation 107 comprises a gel 107 (see [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 18: the gel 107 has a viscosity configured to pass through the one or more openings 106 (see [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 19: the top end 109 is smooth and configured to fit inside a mouth of the animal (see [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
In re claim 20: the animal (dog) licks the formulation from the top end 109 while the top end 109 is positioned inside the mouth of the animal (dog) (see [0061]-[0078] of Mainini et al.).
Claim(s) 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Swaile et al. (US 2014/0154197) which in figures 3A and 6-8 disclose the following claimed invention:
In re claim 13: A method for administering a formulation (gel) to an animal (human), the method comprising: providing a dispenser 10 containing the formulation (gel), the dispenser 10 comprising: a top end 20 comprising one or more openings 22; and a bottom end 30 comprising a grip (grip of 26 in FIG.6) coupled to a tightening mechanism 26; selecting a dose ([0103]) of the formulation based on at least a size of the animal (human); contacting a formulation application area (arm pit) with the top end 20; and turning the grip to a rotational position corresponding to the dose, wherein turning the grip (grip of 26 in FIG.6) to the rotational position causes the tightening mechanism 26 to push the dose of the formulation (gel) through the one or more openings 22 and into contact with the formulation application area (arm pit), thereby administering the dose of the formulation (gel) (see FIGS.6-8 and [0100]-[0104] of Swaile et al.).
In re claim 14: the rotational position comprises a plurality of rotational positions (see FIGS.6-8 and [0103] of Swaile et al.).
In re claim 15: each rotational position of the plurality of rotational positions corresponds to a different dose (see FIGS.6-8 and [0103] of Swaile et al.).
In re claim 16: the grip (grip of 26 in FIG.6) is graduated such that the grip clicks into each rotational position of the plurality of rotational positions (see FIGS.6-8 and [0103] of Swaile et al.).
In re claim 17: the formulation comprises a gel (see [0035], [0041] and [0100]-[0104] of Swaile et al.).
In re claim 18: the gel has a viscosity configured to pass through the one or more openings 22 (see [0035], [0041] and [0100]-[0104] of Swaile et al.).
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.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mainini et al. (US 2014/0048017) in view of Swaile et al. (US 2014/0154197). Mainini et al. discloses the claimed invention as discussed above with not specifically disclosing the following claimed limitation that is taught by Swaile et al.:
In re claim 16: the grip (grip of 26 in FIG.6) is graduated such that the grip clicks into each rotational position of the plurality of rotational positions (see FIGS.6-8 and [0103] of Swaile et al.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the grip of Mainini et al. with a grip that clicks during rotation as taught by Swaile et al. in order to provide the user with an additional indicator for each dose when in use (see [0103] of Swaile et al.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In regard to the newly applied limitation to claims 1-12 and 19-20, the arguments are moot since the newly added limitations required a new rejection including a newly discovered prior art reference. In regard to the arguments regarding the prior art of Swaile et al. as applied to claim 13. The Examiner disagrees, in accordance with MPEP 2111.01, during examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 1369, 70 USPQ2d 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. 2004). In this case the claims does not specifically claim what is argued by the Applicant and furthermore is written in a manner which reads on the applied prior art. Furthermore, the addition of newly added claim 20, required a new rejection for claim 13 in order to also read on claim 20.
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 ERNESTO A GRANO whose telephone number is (571)270-3927. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:30 EST.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571)272-4561. 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.
/ERNESTO A GRANO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735
