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 .
Response to Arguments
In response to the amendments filed 6/29/2026 canceling claim 4, the rejection under 112(b) of claim 4 is withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 6/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive
Regarding claim 1, Applicant notes the claim as been further amended to explicitly disclose the “consumer use unit” as a “water-soluble fibrous structure” to clarify that the articles of manufacture are not merely “any consumer product” but rather a “water-soluble fibrous structure formed by the continuous process.” Applicant argues that the rejection “fails to recognize the distinct and non-obvious nature of the claimed invention.” Examiner does not find the arguments persuasive and notes that Dreher 1 makes a pouch that has a water-soluble fibrous wall structure which is described throughout the reference but particularly at [0001].
Further, Applicant argues that making the process continuous in view of Sang does not establish a motivation to combine the entire process and that Sang is entirely different product with different functional requirements than a water-soluble fibrous structure as amended. Examiner disagrees. Sang is still analogous art because it still discloses a continuous spinning process for soluble materials. As per the PTAB decision from 3/2/2026, “Sang is in the field of art of the claimed process because Sang is directed to a continuous manufacturing extruding fibers from a die to form a fiber structure.” Additionally, Applicant argues that the claimed invention integrates the entire process into a continuous flow and the references do not recognize the challenges and motivations for integrating all the steps. Examiner disagrees and notes that there is no requirement for the references to teach all the possible motivations of a limitation for it to be obvious. In response to applicant's argument that the continuous process achieves unexpected results for optimizing efficiency and product quality, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Additionally, the burden is on Applicant to establish that results are unexpected. Applicant has merely made allegations of unexpected results and has not actually provided any evidence of any results or any evidence that those results are unexpected given what would be expected from the references’ teachings.
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 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 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 1-3, 5-10, 12-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dreher (US 2015/0071572, hereinafter Document 1) modified by Dreher (US 8,980,816 listen on IDS dated 4/23/2019), hereinafter Document 2) and Sang (US 2017/0362124).
Regarding claim 1, Document 1 meets the claimed, A process for making a plurality of articles of manufacture, said articles of manufacture being a consumer use unit that is a water-soluble fibrous structure (Document 1 Abstract and [0001] describe pouches made from water-soluble fibrous wall material which used for dishwashing, etc., indicating that the pouch itself is a consumer use unit) the process comprising the steps of a. providing one or more soluble filament-forming materials; (Document 1 [0057] describes soluble fibers, Document 1 [0223] describes providing filament-forming composition 34 into a tank 36) b. forming an aqueous composition comprising the one or more soluble filament- forming materials; (Document 1 [0190] teaches an aqueous composition made of the filament-forming materials) d. delivering the filament-forming composition to one or more dies; (Document 1 [0214] and [0223] describe transporting the composition 34 to the die via pipes 40) e. spinning the filament-forming composition to form a filament stream comprising a plurality of soluble filaments from the one or more dies; (Document 1 [0216] and [0224] describe a spinning die 38 which spins and extrudes the composition 34) are performed on a single, manufacturing line (Document 1 Figure 9 and [0211]-[0214] or [0223] describe a manufacturing line which is connected via pipes 40, i.e., and single manufacturing line.)
No single embodiment of Document 1 meets all of the claimed, however, other embodiments describe alternative or optional steps and these other embodiments meet the claimed, c. processing the aqueous composition to produce a filament-forming composition (Document 1 [0192] teaches a filament-forming composition is processed) h. converting the composite fibrous structure into articles of manufacture (Document 1 [0233] and [0245] describe stacking fibrous material or using a cutting die to produce samples, and then stacking them, since the samples have been made by the described process, the cut and stacked samples meet the broadest reasonable interpretation of “articles of manufacture”) i. packaging the plurality of articles of manufacture; (Document 1 [0240] describes packaging the manufactured pouches.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the spinning and collecting steps of one embodiment of Document 1 with the processing steps of Document 1 in order to make fibrous elements from the film-forming composition, see [0192]. It would have been further obvious to use a die cutter in order to cut the fibrous structures into usable units, see Document 1 [0245] and package them to protect the packages during transport, see Document 1 [0240].
Document 1 describes adding active agents in the form of powders, see [0213], but does not explicitly describe, f. introducing a plurality of solid additives into the filament stream such that the plurality of solid additives and the plurality of soluble filaments are commingled; g. collecting the commingled solid additives and soluble filaments on a collection device such that a composite fibrous structure comprising commingled soluble filaments and solid additives dispersed throughout the composite fibrous structure is formed;
Analogous in the field of spinning fibrous materials, Document 2 also describes a process of spinning dissolved fibers in a die and extruding them. Document 2 meets the claimed, f. introducing a plurality of solid additives into the filament stream such that the plurality of solid additives and the plurality of soluble filaments are commingled; (Document 2 Example 1 col. 50 lines 60-col. 51 line 50 describe mixing particles into filaments which have been extruded from a die) g. collecting the commingled solid additives and soluble filaments on a collection device such that a composite fibrous structure comprising commingled soluble filaments and solid additives dispersed throughout the composite fibrous structure is formed; (Document 2 Example 1 and col 51 lines 44-64 teach collecting filaments mixed with particles on a collection belt to form a fibrous structure.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the spinning method of Document 1 with the solid additives of Document 2 in order to provide active agents to the article, see col. 2 lines 10-11.
Document 1 describes steps a-e and h-i. Document 2 describes steps f-g. Document 1 Figure 9 and [0211]-[0214] or [0223] describe a manufacturing line which is connected via pipes 40, i.e., and single manufacturing line, and is used for at least claimed steps a, b, d, and e. Additionally, Document 2 Example 1 starting at col. 50 line 61 describes that the disclosed claim steps f and g occur on a single collection belt, i.e., a single manufacturing line. Although the steps c, h, and i are not explicitly disclosed to be on those exact same lines, when those steps are combined with steps a, b, d, and e, the resulting combination would still occur all in the same manufacturing line and therefore meet the claimed, wherein the steps a. through i. are performed on a single, manufacturing line.
Documents 1 and 2 generally describe batch processes and do not meet the claimed, a continuous process, the continuous process, without any breaks or stoppages or interruptions in the process from step a. to step i.
Analogous in the field of fiber structure forming, Sang meets the claimed, a continuous process, the continuous process, without any breaks or stoppages or interruptions in the process from step a. to step i. (Sang [0056] and [0065] teach that the process overall, including a step of mixing/extruding fibers, is continuous. Sang [0085]-[0086] further teach a step of making a board (article of manufacture) using an extruder. Sang [0065] teaches a continuous extruder.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to modify the single line process of Document 1 with the continuous process without stoppages or interruptions of Sang in order to produce an indefinite and continuous length of material rather than pieces of material, see Sang [0056]. Furthermore, making a process continuous is obvious in view of a similar batch process disclosed in the art, see MPEP §2144.04 V Section E., and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to simply modify the disclosed process steps a-i of Documents 1 and 2 to be continuous in view of the batch processes disclosed.
Regarding claim 2, Document 1 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 1 wherein at least one of the one or more soluble filament-forming materials comprises a hydroxyl polymer (Document 1 [0060] teaches the filament-forming material contains a hydroxyl polymer.)
Regarding claim 3, Document 1 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 2 wherein the hydroxyl polymer comprises polyvinyl alcohol (Document 1 [0060] teaches the filament-forming material contains a hydroxyl polymer.)
Regarding claim 5, Document 1 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 1 wherein at least about 30% by weight of water is added to the one or more filament-forming materials in step b (Document 1 [0193] teaches the filament-forming composition is 10%-80% water by weight. It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the weight % of water as taught by Document 1 in order to change how the fibers or particles react and release active agents, see Document 1 [0188].)
Regarding claim 6, Document 1 does not meet the claimed, the process according to Claim 1 wherein the step of processing the aqueous composition occurs within an extruder.
Analogous in the field of fiber structure forming, Sang meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 1 wherein the step of processing the aqueous composition occurs within an extruder (Sang [0052] teaches the use of an extruder to mix polymer, starch, and fiber compositions.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the spinning method of Document 1 with the extruder of Sang in order to mix the polymer and other components, see Sang [0052].
Regarding claim 7, Document 1 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 6 wherein the aqueous composition present in the extruder exhibits a % solids of from about 20% to about 95% (Document 1 [0193] teaches the filament-forming materials (solids) comprise 20%-90% by weight of the filament forming composition.)
Regarding claim 8, Document 1 does not meet the claimed, the process according to Claim 6 wherein the filament-forming composition exits the extruder at an exit pressure of from about 10 to about 80 bar.
Analogous in the field of fiber structure forming, Sang meets the claimed the process according to Claim 6 wherein the filament-forming composition exits the extruder at an exit pressure of from about 10 to about 80 bar (Sang [0063] describes various temperatures from 2,000 psi to 5,000 psi (~138 bar to ~345 bar) and does not explicitly teach the claimed range of 10- 80 bar, however, Sang [0063] teaches the extruder pressure varies as the material, moisture content, and temperature vary.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the extrusion pressure depending on the water content and materials used, see Sang [0063]. It would have been further obvious to combine the spinning method of Document 1 with the extrusion pressure of Sang in order to effectively mix the ingredients, see Sang [0052].
Regarding claim 9, Document 1 does not meet the claimed, the process according to Claim 6 wherein the extruder subjects the filament-forming composition to a temperature of at least 49°C.
Analogous in the field of fiber structure forming, Sang meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 6 wherein the extruder subjects the filament-forming composition to a temperature of at least 49°C (Sang does not explicitly teach the temperature that the fibers are subjected to is at 49°C, however, Sang [0067] teaches that increased temperature is required in the extruder and Sang [0061] and [0086] describe die temperatures of 150ºC to 210 ºC which are indicative that temperature inside of the die reaches over 49ºC. These are known temperature ranges for dies and extruders that can be varied based on the solubility and material used in the process.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to optimize the extruder temperature as taught by Sang in order to increase solubility, see Sang [0081]. It would have been further obvious to combine the spinning method of Document 1 with the temperature of the extruder of Sang in order to dissolve the fibers, see Sang [0081].
Regarding claim 10, Document 1 does not meet the claimed, the process according to Claim 6 wherein the filament-forming composition exits the extruder specific mechanical energy on a solids throughput basis of from about 0.10 to about 0.50 kW-h/kg.
Sang meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 6 wherein the filament-forming composition exits the extruder on a solids throughput basis of from about 0.10 to about 0.50 kW-h/kg (Sang does not explicitly teach the SME is 0.10 kW-h/kg to 0.50 kW-h/kg, however, Sang [0066] teaches that the specific mechanical energy will depend on the moisture content.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date that the SME of the mixture being extruded will vary depending on the moisture content of the mixture. It would be obvious to optimize the moisture content, and thus the SME, see Sang [0066]. It would have been obvious to combine the spinning method of Document 1 with the SME of Sang in order to optimize energy and mixing based on moisture content, see Sang [0066].
Regarding claim 12, Document 2 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 1 wherein the solid additives comprise particles (Document 2 col. 50 lines 60- col 51 line 50 describe spreading particles into the soluble filaments.)
Regarding claim 13, Document 2 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 12 wherein at least one of the particles is an agglomerate (Document 2 col. 5 lines 32-33 teach the particle may contain multiple active agents, multiple agents would be an agglomerate.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the spinning method of Document 1 with the agglomerate particle of Document 2 in order to provide active agents to the article, see col. 2 lines 10-11.
Regarding claim 14, Document 2 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 12 wherein the particles comprise active agent-containing particle (Document 2 col. 2 lines 4-17 teach active agent-containing particle.)
Regarding claim 15, Document 1 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 1 wherein at least one of the soluble filaments comprises one or more active agents present within the filament (Document 1 [0212] describes adding active agents to the filament-forming composition 34.)
Regarding claim 16, Document 1 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 15 wherein at least one of the one or more active agents is added in the process in at least one of steps b, c, and d (Document 1 [0212] describes adding active agents to the filament-forming composition 34.)
Regarding claim 18, Document 1 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 1 wherein the step of converting the step of converting the composite fibrous structure comprises one or more converting operations selected from the group consisting of: slitting, stacking, calendering, treating with optional ingredients, printing , and combinations thereof (Document 1 [0233] describe a stacking operation which includes overlapping one piece of fibrous material with another to make a water soluble pouch.)
Regarding claim 19, Document 1 describes a single line, folding, and stacking operations but does not specify where or which line the folding or stacking operations are performed and does not explicitly meet the claimed, The process according to Claim 18 wherein the one or more converting operations are performed on a single converting line, however, the claimed steps a, b, d, and e are taught by Document 1 as occurring on a single manufacturing line. When the stacking and cutting operations described in [0233] and [0245] are combined with the process occurring on the single line as disclosed in the previously cited embodiment, the resulting combination is that the converting operation also occurs on a single line and meets the claimed, wherein the one or more converting operations are performed on a single converting line.
Regarding claim 20, Document 1 meets the claimed, the process according to Claim 18 wherein the one or more converting operations yields a consumer useable saleable unit (Document 1 [0233] describe a stacking operation which includes overlapping one piece of fibrous material with another to make a water soluble pouch, [0239] discloses the pouch is used by the consumer and is therefore “a consumer useable saleable unit”.)
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 VICTORIA BARTLETT whose telephone number is (571)272-4953. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 am-5:00 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, Sam Zhao can be reached on 571-270-5343. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/V.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/EMMANUEL S LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights