DETAILED ACTION
Formal Matters
Claims 1-10 are pending and under examination.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
This application is a national stage entry of PCT/US2023/015625 filed on 03/20/2023, which claims priority to US provisional 63/322,240 filed on 3/22/2022.
Information Disclosure Statements
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 09/17/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to for recitations of “antimicrobial agent/preservative”, “protein/amino acid” and “a hair waving/straightening agent” as these can more appropriately be listed as separate items “antimicrobial agent; preservative”, “protein; amino acid”, “a hair waving agent; a hair straightening agent” in this Markush group of optional items. Appropriate correction is required.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 1-10 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bai WO2021194809A1 (Published 9-30-2021) and Fernandes WO2021194804A1 (published 9-30-2021 and effectively filed on 3-24-2020).
Bai teaches a hair care formulation is provided, comprising: a dermatologically acceptable vehicle; a dermatologically acceptable oil; and a deposition aid polymer, wherein the deposition aid polymer is a dextran polymer functionalized with an amine group; wherein the dextran polymer has a weight average molecular weight of 100,000 to 650,000 Daltons (abstract). Bai teaches leave on and rinse off conditions (claim 2 of Bai). Bai teaches TKN, of 0,5 to 4.5 wt% (claim 4 of Bai). Bai teaches tertiary amine groups and quaternary ammonium groups attached to pendant oxygens on the dextran polymer that include using morpholine (paragraphs 22-24). Bai does not teach a combination of items as in applicant’s claim 4, and thus, will have 0% wt of this combination. Bai provides for less than 0.01 mol% or down to 0 of reactive siloxane (paragraph 30). Bai teaches down to 0.01 wt% oil in its preferable embodiment (paragraph 14). Bai teaches “optionally, further comprises at least one additional ingredient selected from the group consisting of a hair care cleansing surfactant; an antimicrobial agent/preservative (e.g., benzoic acid, sorbic acid, phenoxyethanol, methylisothiazolinone); a rheology modifier (e.g., PEG- 150 pentaerythrityl tetrastearate); a soap; a colorant; pH adjusting agent; an antioxidant (e.g., butylated hydroxy toluene); a humectant (e.g., glycerin, sorbitol, monoglycerides, lecithins, glycolipids, fatty alcohols, fatty acids, polysaccharides, sorbitan esters, polysorbates (e.g., Polysorbate 20, Polysorbate 40, Polysorbate 60, and Polysorbate 80), diols (e.g., propylene glycol), diol analogs, triols, triol analogs, cationic polymeric polyols); a wax: a foaming agent: an emulsifying agent; a colorant; a fragrance; a chelating agent (e.g., tetrasodium ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid); a preservative (e.g., benzoic acid, sorbic acid, phenoxyethanol, methylisothiazolinone); a bleaching agent; a lubricating agent; a sensory modifier; a sunscreen additive; a vitamin; a protein/amino acid: a plant extract; a natural ingredient; a bioactive agent; an anti-aging agent; a pigment; an acid; a penetrant; an anti-static agent; an anti-frizz agent; an antidandruff agent; a hair waving/straightening agent; a hair styling agent; a hair oil; an absorbent; a hard particle; a soft particle; a conditioning agent (e.g., guar hydroxypropyltrimonium chloride, PQ-10, PQ-7); a slip agent; an opaeifier; a pearlizing agent and a salt. More preferably, the hair care formulation of the present invention, optionally, further comprises at least one additional ingredient selected from the group consisting of a hair care cleansing surfactant; an antimicrobial agent/preservative (e.g., benzoic acid, sorbic acid, phenoxyethanol, methylisothiazolinone); a rheology modifier (e.g., PEG- 150 pentaerythrityl tetrastearate); and a chelating agent (e.g., tetrasodium ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid).” (paragraph 31). Bai teaches applying the formulation to hair (paragraph 38). Bai teaches R10 on the quaternary ammonium group as methyl or ethyl (paragraphs 23-24). Bai sees its polymer as helping to deposit an oil from the hair formulation onto the hair (abstract). Bai does provide a teaching that removing too much oils, which is a function of hair cleansing formulations, can be desirable and also be undesirable with removal of too much oil would lead to hair being less protected (paragraph 3). Example S1 teaches a degree of substitution of 0.24 and example S2 teaches a degree of substitution of 0.335.
Bai does not teach one of its R10 groups of the quaternary ammonium group as being a linear or branched C8-20 alkyl group, Bai allows down to 0.01wt% oil in its formulations, but does not indicate a value below it.
Fernandes teaches an option (A) of quaternary ammonium with R2 and an R3 groups (paragraph 22) for a dextran polymer group (abstract and claims of Fernandes). Fernandes teaches “wherein each R2 is independently selected from the group consisting of a C1-7 alkyl group (preferably, a C1-3 alkyl group; more preferably, a methyl group and an ethyl group; most preferably, a methyl group); and wherein R3 is selected from the group consisting of a C1-22 alkyl group (preferably, selected from the group consisting of a C1-3 alkyl group and a C6-22 alkyl group” (paragraph 22). Fernandes sees hair oil as an optional component in a list of various additional ingredients (paragraph 27). Fernandes sees its products as advantageous to deposition of silicone from the formulation to mammalian hair (abstract). Fernandes does provide a teaching that removing too much oils, which is a function of hair cleansing formulations, can be desirable and also be undesirable with removal of too much oil would lead to hair being less protected (paragraph 3). Fernandes does recognize that high silicone levels can be detrimental to the product and that deposition aids can make silicone deposition more efficient (paragraphs 5 and 6). Fernandes teaches a trimethylammonium degree of substitution of 0.19 (paragraph 36). Fernandes teaches adding the quaternary amine groups to pendent oxygens of the dextran polymer (paragraph 22). Fernandes teaches a TKN of 1 to 4 wt% (claim 4 of Fernandes). Fernandes teaches applying the formulation to hair (claim 10 of Fernandes).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing would have utilized other quaternary ammonium groups of the prior art of Bai and Fernandes to include on an amine group containing dextran polymer for hair care products as each reference provides for use of amine group containing dextran polymers for hair conditioning products and allow for tertiary and quaternary ammonium groups on the dextran polymers. Thus, there would be a reasonable expectation of success in combining the teachings of the references to provide dextran polymers that would both deposit any silicones and oils from the hair formulation onto the hair to achieve their functions on hair protection. In having better, more efficient deposition of oils and silicones due to the presence of the cationic polymer, one of ordinary skill in the art would consider using lower amounts of silicones and/or oils in the formulation to obtain similar hair benefits while reducing undesirable properties of excessive ingredients such as too much oiliness or greasiness.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK V STEVENS whose telephone number is (571)270-7080. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 am to 6:00 pm 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, Brian-Yong Kwon can be reached on (571)272-0581. 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.
/MARK V STEVENS/
Examiner, Art Unit 1613
Prosecution Insights