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 § 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 1-9, 13, 16, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko et al, US 2024/0057587.
Kaneko et al teach a solid enzyme stabilizer composition, wherein a preferred stabilizer is triethanolamine formate (¶283). These compounds are formed as a 50% solution where an enzyme is added and dissolved therein at a stabilizer:enzyme ratio of 10:1 (¶754 and table 11). Though ultimately the water is removed, before this occurs, a stabilizer and enzyme are present as a liquid, and so claim 1 is satisfied when triethanolamine formate is used as the stabilizer, which is obvious to use as it is taught as a preferred stabilizer by the reference.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Letton et al, US 4,318,818.
Letton et al teach a liquid detergent composition with a stabilized aqueous enzyme composition comprising LAS, 1% triethanolamine formate, propylene glycol, 0.05% protease, and the balance water (col. 10, lines 39-45 and example III). The enzyme may be present in amounts as high as 10% and the formate salt may be present in amounts as high as 10% (claim 15). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use greater amounts of enzyme and triethanolamine formate in example III as greater amounts are contemplated by the reference. With respect to the method of making the composition, as the title of the invention is stabilized aqueous enzyme compositions, the examiner maintains this limitation is satisfied, and in any event, it is not inventive to add water to a detergent ingredient.
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