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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 9, 2025, has been entered.
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 (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 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 1-6, 8-10, 12, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2007/0151800 to Olson in view of USPN 4,837,067 to Carey and US Pub. No. 2006/0225952 to Takayasu.
Regarding claims 1-6, 8-10, 12, 14, and 16, Olson teaches an acoustic insulating sheet comprising in laminar assembly a primary sound absorbing sheet and a dense porous membrane, wherein the membrane is about 200 micrometers or less in thickness (Olson, Abstract). Olson teaches that the membrane has a specific airflow resistance of no more than about 10,000 rayls, or no more than about 5000 rayls (Id., paragraph 0009). Olson teaches that a fibrous web is preferably used as the starting sheet material, including spunbond webs, carded or air-laid staple fiber webs, or combinations of such webs (Id., paragraph 0013). Olson teaches that the starting sheet material should generally be softenable by heat, including blends of material, wherein the material may include bicomponent fibers (Id., paragraph 0015). Olson teaches that different material such as fibers of different materials may be combined to prepare a blended web (Id., paragraph 0016). Olson teaches that the web may comprise a single unitary layer or more than one layer, such as layers that differ according to the diameter of the fibers used in the layers (Id., paragraph 0017). Olson teaches that the membrane generally as a low basis weight, i.e., preferably about 100 grams per square meter or less (Id., paragraph 0020). Olson teaches an exemplary carded web containing 1.9 denier fibers (Id., paragraph 0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the acoustic insulating sheet of Olson, wherein the membrane comprises a carded staple fiber web consisting of fibers having a linear density within the claimed range, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional acoustic insulating sheet based on the totality of the teachings of Olson.
Olson teaches the carded staple fiber nonwoven web within the scope of the claimed second nonwoven material, but Olson does not appear to teach the claimed first nonwoven material. However, Olson teaches that the primary sound absorbing sheet used in laminar assembly with a membrane of the invention can be generally any of the known sound insulating sheet materials (Olson, paragraph 0021).
Carey teaches a nonwoven insulating batt comprising structural fibers and bonding fibers, wherein the bonding fibers are heat bonded to the structural fibers and other bonding fibers at points of contact (Carey, Abstract, column 6 lines 55-62). Carey teaches that the structural fibers have fiber deniers preferably ranging from 0.2 to 15 denier (Id., column 4 lines 10-26). Carey teaches that finer denier fibers increase the thermal insulating properties and decrease the compressive strength of the batt, while larger denier fibers decrease the thermal insulating properties and increase the compressive strength of the batt (Id.). Carey teaches that the bonding fibers may be meltable fibers, adhesive coated fibers, and bicomponent bonding fibers, wherein a range of bonding fiber sizes is from about 0.5 to 15 denier (Id., column 4 lines 27-60). Carey teaches that the batts have a basis weight of from 10 to 400 g/m2, most preferably 50 to 150 g/m2 based on the thermal insulating properties and bulk density (Id., column 5 lines 15-30). Carey teaches that the batts are useful for acoustical insulation (Id., column 7 lines 9-15).
Additionally, Takayasu teaches a sound absorbing material excellent in sound absorbency, workability and low cost, comprising a non-woven fabric (Takayasu, paragraph 0021). Takayasu teaches that the fiber length and fineness are not particularly limited, wherein the fiber may either be a filament or a staple fiber having a fineness of 0.5 to 30 dtex, preferably 1.0 to 20 dtex (Id., paragraph 0029). Takayasu teaches that longer fiber length makes sound absorbency of the nonwoven fabric better (Id.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the acoustic insulating sheet of Olson, wherein the primary sound absorbing sheet has a basis weight, such as within the claimed range, and comprises structural and bonding fibers having a linear density, such as within the claimed ranges, wherein each of the fibers are in the form of filaments, as taught by Carey and Takayasu, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional acoustic insulating sheet comprising a primary sound absorbing layer having a structure and composition known in the art as providing excellent sound absorbency, and compressive strength suitable for insulation applications.
Regarding the claimed weight and thickness and rayls, Olson teaches that it was known to combine a primary, relatively thick fibrous sheet and a secondary, thinner sheet or membrane, wherein the primary sheet and membrane reduce noise better than the primary sheet by itself (Olson, paragraphs 0002, 0011). Olson establishes that the membrane is about 200 micrometers or less in thickness, and that the membrane has a specific airflow resistance of no more than about 10,000 rayls, or no more than about 5000 rayls, wherein the membrane generally as a low basis weight, i.e., preferably about 100 grams per square meter or less. Additionally, Carey teaches a nonwoven insulating batt having a basis weight of from 10 to 400 g/m2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the acoustic insulating sheet of the prior art combination, and adjusting and varying the thicknesses and basis weights of the layers and the composite, such as within the claimed ranges, and the corresponding rayl value, as taught by Olson and Carey, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional acoustic insulating sheet having the desired properties including airflow resistance suitable for the intended application.
Regarding the first nonwoven being configured as claimed, it should be noted that the ability to be impregnated with a polymer coating and the resulting product are dictated by the identity of the polymer coating and its properties, and the process parameters associated with impregnating with the polymer coating. However, since the prior art combination establishes a substantially similar structure and composition as claimed, for a similar use as claimed, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill to expect that the primary sound absorbing sheet (i.e. the first nonwoven material) is configured within the scope of the claim. Such a conclusion is additionally supported by the prior art combination establishing that the sheet is a sound absorbing sheet having an airflow resistance, thereby establishing that the primary sound absorbing sheet comprises pores to provide a tortuous path as claimed.
Regarding claims 2-4, as set forth above, the prior art combination teaches that the structural fibers may be fibers and that the bonding fibers may be meltable fibers or bicomponent fibers.
Regarding claim 5 and 6, Olson suggests bonding multiple layers with heat and pressure (Olson, paragraph 0007). Olson does not appear to teach bonding with an adhesive powder. However, Takayasu teaches bonding a surface material and a non-woven fabric by conventional bonding, including bonding using adhesives, thermal embossing or adhesive resin powder (Takayasu, paragraph 0060). Takayasu teaches that the degree of bonding effects both the firmness of the bond and the sound absorption coefficient (Id., paragraph 0061).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the acoustic insulating sheet of the prior art combination, wherein the layers are adhesively powder bonded, as taught by Takayasu, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional acoustic insulating sheet which is sufficiently bonded while balancing the sound absorption coefficient.
Claims 7 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson in view of Carey and Takayasu, as applied to claims 1-6, 8-10, 12, 14, and 16 above, and further in view of US Pub. No. 2008/0050565 to Gross.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art combination teaches bonding multiple layers with a powder adhesive, but does not appear to teach the claimed powder. However, Gross teaches an improved acoustically and thermally insulating fire retardant composite material suitable for use in structures such as the interior passenger compartments of automotive vehicles (Gross, Abstract). Gross teaches that the nonwoven material contains a substrate comprising matrix fibers including synthetic fibers or a mixture thererof, wherein the binder of the nonwoven material is a bicomponent fiber binder, a latex binder, a thermoplastic material, or a mixture thereof (Id., paragraphs 0016-0019). Gross teaches that the nonwoven material may be a spunbond nonwoven (Id., paragraph 0023). Note that spunbonding is ordinarily known in the art as forming continuous filaments. Gross teaches that synthetic fibers suitable for use as matrix fibers or bicomponent fiber fibers include fibers made from various polymers (Id., paragraphs 0138-0143). Gross teaches that the matrix fibers can be held by a binder such as bicomponent fibers (Id., paragraph 0146) or thermoplastic materials in the form of powders, such as powdered polyethylene (Id., paragraph 0147), to consolidate and hold the material together (Id., paragraph 0146) and for greater rigidity (Id., paragraph 0196). Gross teaches that the fibers are bonded by passage through an oven to fuse the included thermoplastic or other binder materials (Id., paragraph 0204). Gross teaches that the nonwoven substrate has a basis weight of from about 10 gsm to about 2000 gsm (Id., paragraph 0130). Gross teaches that the nonwoven material contains a nonwoven carrier or scrim integral with the surface of the material, wherein the scrim may be nonwoven and having a basis weight of from about 8 gsm to about 200 gsm (Id., paragraphs 0164-0167). Gross teaches that the scrim can be formed by a carding process (Id., paragraph 0170). Gross teaches that the nonwoven structure having a scrim will have a low caliper, such as from about 1 to about 7 mm (Id., paragraph 0190). Gross teaches that the nonwoven material can be bonded to a structural support, such as rug or carpeting, or as a trunk liner (Id., paragraph 0213).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the acoustic insulating sheet of the prior art combination, wherein the adhesive powder comprises polyethylene adhesive powders, as taught by Gross, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional acoustical insulation material comprising an adhesive known in the art as being predictably suitable for bonding similar insulation materials.
Regarding claims 12-15, the prior art combination suggests that multilayered laminates are useful as sound-absorbing insulation for automobiles (Olson, paragraph 0006) such as vehicle interior materials (Takayasu, paragraphs 0053, 0065). Additionally, Gross teaches and suggests use of the laminate in interior materials, including bonding the fabric material to a structural support, such as rug or carpeting, or as a trunk liner (Gross, paragraph 0213). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the acoustic insulating sheet of the prior art combination, wherein the fabric is bonded to a structural support for use as carpeting or as a trunk liner, as taught by Gross, motivated by the desire of using the acoustic insulating sheet in a known and predictably suitable manner based on the teachings of the prior art.
Regarding claim 14, as set forth above, the prior art combination teaches a Rayl value within the claimed range. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the acoustic insulating sheet of the prior art combination, and adjusting and varying the thicknesses and basis weights of the layers and the composite, and the corresponding rayl value, as taught by Olson and Carey, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional acoustic insulating sheet having the desired properties including airflow resistance suitable for the intended application.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed September 9, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants argue that Applicants’ specification at paragraph 0017 provides clear evidence that nonwoven materials with filaments having a linear density less than 5 dtex are unsuitable for the intended purposes as they become “closed off (almost) completely while be impregnated with a polymer coating.” Therefore, Applicants argue that since Carey and Takayasu teach fibers down to 0.2 denier and 0.5 dtex, a person of ordinary skill attempting to solve the problem of maintaining porosity after impregnation would be taught by Applicants’ disclosure that lower denier ranges would lead to failure.
Regarding Applicants’ arguments, Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claimed invention recites that the first nonwoven material is configured to be impregnated with a polymer coating, while avoiding that the composite acoustic layer is completely closed off when being impregnated with a polymer coating (emphasis added). The claimed invention does not require impregnating with a polymer coating, a process of impregnating including the amount of polymer, nor the identity of the polymer, including any properties of the polymer such as molecular weight or viscosity. Since the prior art combination teaches a substantially similar structure and composition as claimed, including overlapping linear densities and reasons for increasing the linear density (i.e. to predictably improve compressive strength), the claimed property appears to naturally flow from the invention of the prior art.
Additionally, the portion cited by Applicants is directed to a coating comprising or consisting of polyethylene, when being attached to the back side of a greige carpet. Additionally, note that Applicants’ specification at page 3 lines 11-19 recites that the first nonwoven material consists of filaments having a linear density in the range of 2 to 50 dtex. Therefore, although the claimed range is 7 to 15 dtex, it is noted that filaments having a linear density of less than 5 dtex are not unsuitable for the intended purpose, as evidenced by Applicants’ specification.
Applicants argue that there is no teaching or suggestion to select the claimed filament density in combination with the claimed basis weight, as it is not a matter of routine experimentation and allows the claimed function to be realized, as Applicants’ disclosure demonstrates its criticality. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As set forth above, the claimed linear density and basis weight are rendered obvious over the prior art combination, based on the predictably desired properties including compressive strength and bulk density. Additionally, the ranges do not appear to be critical, as Applicants’ specification at page 3 lines 11-19 and page 10 lines 3-5 recite linear density and first nonwoven material weight ranges broader than the claimed range, which are suitable for the claimed invention. Therefore, it is unclear how the claimed ranges are critical based on Applicants’ disclosure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER Y CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-6730. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/PETER Y CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786