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
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.
Claims 1, 6-8, 11-15, 17, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Pub. No. 2002/0143116 to Noda in view of US Pub. No. 2014/0127364 to Fu.
Regarding claims 1, 6-8, 11-15, 17, 19, and 21, Noda teaches environmentally degradable melt spun fibers comprising polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) copolymer and a polylactic acid (PLA), including nonwoven webs comprising sheath/core environmentally degradable fibers (Noda, Abstract). Noda teaches that the sheath/core bicomponent fibers may comprise a PHA/PLA composition in the core with the sheath being pure PLA (i.e. 100%), wherein the exact configuration desired is dependent upon the use of the fiber (Id., paragraphs 0049-0052). Noda teaches that polyhydroxyalkanoate copolymers are typically present in an amount of from 1% to 90% (Id., paragraph 0031) and that the PLA polymer or copolymer is present in an amount of from 100% to 90% (Id., paragraph 0042). Noda teaches that the composition may further comprise a second PHA polymer, wherein the composition comprises from about 0.1 to about 3 weight percent of the second PHA polymer (Id., paragraphs 0025-0029). Note either the PHA copolymer or the second PHA copolymer are within the scope of the claimed plasticizer. Noda teaches that the polyhydroxyalkanoate copolymer will make the fiber rapidly environmentally degradable and that the PLA polymer will make the polymer blend spinnable and help to prevent stickiness that is commonly associated with polyhydroxyalkanoate polymers (Id., paragraph 0013). Noda teaches that the blended material has different and improved properties as compared to PHA or PLA polymers alone, including softness, flexibility and toughness, among others (Id., paragraph 0010). Noda teaches that the products are suitable for use in coffee filters, tea or coffee bags (Id., paragraph 0076).
Noda does not appear to teach the method for fabricating a filter. However, Fu teaches a method for making a beverage capsule having a bonding defining an opening and a filter disposed in the opening and secured to the body, wherein the filter is a moldable nonwoven fabric comprising fibers that are partially drawn prior to molding (Fu, Abstract). Fu teaches that the filter is a moldable nonwoven fabric has a basis weight in the range of 40 to 150 gsm (Id., paragraph 0030), and that the fabric is comprised of multicomponent fibers formed of a first and a second material, wherein the first material may be polylactic acid (Id., paragraphs 0032, 0034). Fu teaches that the fabric preferably comprises partially drawn fibers in order that the fibers have the capability to be drawn sufficiently during the filter molding process to form a desired depth of filter (Id., paragraph 0035). Fu teaches that the fibers may be bonded thermally, wherein an exemplary bonding method includes calendaring (Id., paragraphs 0036, 0037). Fu teaches that the beverage capsule includes a body, filter and cover, the body including a side wall and end wall (Id., paragraphs 0025-0026). Fu teaches that the body may comprise a structure that is adapted to support the filter (Id., paragraphs 0029, 0033). Fu teaches that the filter is formed by disposing the fabric over the opening of the body, sealing a gasket portion to a sealing layer and a portion of the fabric, and then partially sealing the cover to the gasket portion (Id., paragraphs 0041-0042, Fig. 4).
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 environmentally degradable nonwoven filter webs of Noda, wherein the filter webs are fabricated into a beverage capsule structure as claimed by thermal bonding and molding, as taught by Fu, motivated by the desire of using the environmentally degradable nonwoven filter webs to form a beverage capsule in a known and predictable manner.
Regarding claims 7, 8, and 21, the prior art combination teaches that polyhydroxyalkanoate copolymers are typically present in an amount of from 1% to 90%, and that composition may comprise from about 0.1 to about 3 weight percent of the second PHA polymer. The prior art combination teaches that the ratio of the weight of the sheath to the core is from about 5:95 to about 95:5 (Noda, paragraph 0050, Examples 1-4).
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 environmentally degradable nonwoven filter webs of the prior art combination, and adjusting and varying the weights of the sheath and core and the amount of PHA or second PHA polymers, such as within the claimed ranges, as taught by Noda, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional environmentally degradable nonwoven filter web having the desired amount of PHA and resulting properties, based on the totality of the teachings of the prior art.
Regarding claims 13 and 17, the prior art combination teaches that the fibers are compostable based on ASTM 6400-99 specifications (Noda, paragraph 0059).
Regarding claims 14, 15, 17, and 19, the prior art combination teaches that the beverage capsule includes a body, filter and cover, the body including a side wall and end wall (Fu, paragraphs 0025-0026). The prior art combination teaches that the body may comprise a structure that is adapted to support the filter (Id., paragraphs 0029, 0033). The prior art combination teaches that the filter is formed by disposing the fabric over the opening of the body, sealing a gasket portion to a sealing layer and a portion of the fabric, and then partially sealing the cover to the gasket portion (Id., paragraphs 0041-0042, Fig. 4).
Claims 2, 3, 10, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Noda in view of Fu, as applied to claims 1, 6-8, 11-15, 17, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of US Pub. No. 2014/0263033 to Fu (herein referred to as “Fu II”).
Regarding claims 2, 3, and 16, the prior art combination teaches that the fibers are partially drawn during the filter molding process to form a desired depth of filter. The prior art combination does not appear to teach the claimed properties. However, Fu II teaches a process for forming a three-dimensional structure from a non-woven web made of synthetic polymer filaments, such as for use in beverage capsules, comprising subjecting the web to a molding force at a temperature between the glass transition temperature and the melting temperature of the polymer (Fu II, Abstract). Fu II teaches that the nonwoven web may comprise multi-component filaments comprising polylactic acid and have a basis weight in the range of 30 to 200 gsm (Id., paragraphs 0039, 0053-0054). Fu II teaches that the molding step involves an increase in the surface area of the web, such as an increase in the surface area of the web in the range of from 200% to 800% (Id., paragraph 0047). Fu II teaches that an exemplary depth is 34 mm (Id., Fig. 1B). Fu II teaches that the web may have a bonded area formed by thermal bonding (Id., paragraph 0044, claims 1-20). Fu II teaches that the process results in a structure that retains the desired shape and allows control of the pore size distribution of the resulting structure (Id., paragraph 0010).
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the molding step involved an increase in surface area of the web and a depth, such as within the claimed ranges, as taught by Fu II, motivated by the desire of forming a beverage capsule with a molding process known in the art to predictably result in a structure that retains the desired shape and allows control of the pore size distribution of the resulting structure.
Regarding claims 10 and 18, the prior art combination teaches melting and spinning the fibers, and partially drawing the fibers, followed by thermally bonding, such as by calendaring (Fu, paragraphs 0035-0037). Additionally, Fu II teaches that prior to the molding step, the nonwoven web has a substantially planar form (Fu II, paragraph 0047). Fu II teaches that some stretching of the filaments during the spinning process is acceptable (Id., paragraphs 0027-0028). It is reasonable for one of ordinary skill in the art to expect that the fibers are at least partially cooled and stretched during the fiber forming process, in order to align the molecules within the filament. Additionally, in order to form a substantially planar nonwoven web, it is ordinarily known in the art to deposit the fibers on a forming mat.
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the fabric is formed by spinning the fibers and at least partially cooling and partially drawing or stretching the fibers and collecting the fibers on a mat such that the fabric is substantially planar, and subsequently calendaring the fabric, as suggested by Fu and Fu II, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional nonwoven web for use as a filter which is suitably bonded and capable of being molded into a beverage capsule.
Claims 4, 5, 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Noda in view of Fu, as applied to claims 1, 6-8, 11-15, 17, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of USPN 5,698,322 to Tsai.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the prior art combination does not appear to teach the specifically claimed PLA-1 and PLA-2. However, Tsai teaches a nonwoven comprising fibers (Tsai, Abstract), consisting of a core (Id., column 3 lines 33-36), for example a sheath/core arrangement, containing polylactic acid (PLA-1) (Id., Abstract). Tsai teaches that the multicomponent fibers comprise two poly(lactic acid) polymers with different L:D ratios (Id., column 2 lines 60-65) coated with an envelope (Id., column 3 lines 33-36) containing polylactic acid (PLA-2) (Id., Abstract, column 2 line 66 to column 3 line 11), wherein PLA-1 is a copolymer of lactic acid monomers L1 and lactic acid monomers D1 (Id., column 2 lines 60-65, column 4 lines 47-54), having two optical isomers referred to, respectively as the levorotatory (hereinafter referred to as "L") enantiomer and the dextrorotatory (hereinafter referred to as "D") enantiomer. Tsai teaches that by polymerizing a particular enantiomer or by using a mixture of the two enantiomers, PLA-2 is a copolymer of lactic acid monomers L2 and lactic acid D2 (Id., column 2 line 66 to column 3 line 11). Tsai teaches that the second component comprises a second poly(lactic acid) polymer with a L:D ratio that is greater than the L:D ratio exhibited by the first poly(lactic acid) polymer (Id., column 4 lines 47-54), whose D2 monomers rate is greater than the monomers rate D1 of PLA-1 (Id., Tables 1 and 3, Sample 1, 2).
Tsai teaches that the core further contains a plasticizer (Id., column 7 lines 26-46). Tsai teaches that the plasticizer is present beneficially less than about 7 percent (Id., column 7 lines 26-46). Tsai teaches that the multicomponent fibers comprise biodegradable properties which allow for the fiber to be easily processed (Id., column 1 lines 5-14).
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the polylactic acid components comprise the polylactic acid components as taught by Tsai, motivated by the desire of forming a beverage capsule with multicomponent polylactic acid fibers which are known in the art to be readily degradable in the environment while also being easily and efficiently prepared.
Regarding claims 13 and 17, the prior art combination teaches that the fibers are compostable based on ASTM 6400-99 specifications (Noda, paragraph 0059). Alternatively, since the nonwoven of the prior art combination comprises a substantially similar structure and composition as claimed, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill to expect that meeting the claimed biodegradability standard would naturally flow from the invention of the prior art combination. Products of identical structure cannot have mutually exclusive properties. The burden is on Applicants to prove otherwise.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Noda in view of Fu, as applied to claims 1, 6-8, 11-15, 17, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of Fu II and US Pub. No. 2012/0070551 to Mahlich
Regarding claim 9, the prior art combination teaches that the fabric has a basis weight in the range of 40 to 150 gsm. Additionally, in the process of Fu II, the web is made of filaments having a mean diameter in the range of 5 to 50 µm (Fu II, paragraph 0054).
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the biodegradable multicomponent polylactic acid fibers comprise a diameter, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Fu II, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional beverage capsule comprising fiber diameters known in the art as being predictably suitable for such applications. Note that biodegradable multicomponent polylactic acid fibers comprising a diameter within the claimed range would also comprise a linear density within the claimed range.
The prior art combination does not appear to teach the claimed thickness. However, Mahlich teaches a similar beverage capsule comprising a nonwoven filter element (Mahlich, Abstract). Mahlich teaches that the non-woven is produced from fine plastic fibers, such as polyester fibers, wherein the non-woven has a mass per unit area of between 40 and 100 grams per square meter and a thickness of between 0.20 and 0.8 millimeters (Id., paragraph 0011). Mahlich teaches that the non-woven is preferably stretched and sealed (Id., paragraphs 0012, 0013).
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the nonwoven filter web comprises a thickness, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Mahlich, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional beverage capsule comprising a nonwoven filter web thickness known in the art as being predictably suitable for such applications.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Noda in view of Fu, Tsai, Noda, Fu II, and Mahlich.
Regarding claim 20, the teachings of Noda in view of Fu set forth above are incorporated herein.
The prior art combination does not appear to teach the specifically claimed PLA-1 and PLA-2. However, Tsai teaches a nonwoven comprising fibers (Tsai, Abstract), consisting of a core (Id., column 3 lines 33-36), for example a sheath/core arrangement, containing polylactic acid (PLA-1) (Id., Abstract). Tsai teaches that the multicomponent fibers comprise two poly(lactic acid) polymers with different L:D ratios (Id., column 2 lines 60-65) coated with an envelope (Id., column 3 lines 33-36) containing polylactic acid (PLA-2) (Id., Abstract, column 2 line 66 to column 3 line 11), wherein PLA-1 is a copolymer of lactic acid monomers L1 and lactic acid monomers D1 (Id., column 2 lines 60-65, column 4 lines 47-54), having two optical isomers referred to, respectively as the levorotatory (hereinafter referred to as "L") enantiomer and the dextrorotatory (hereinafter referred to as "D") enantiomer. Tsai teaches that by polymerizing a particular enantiomer or by using a mixture of the two enantiomers, PLA-2 is a copolymer of lactic acid monomers L2 and lactic acid D2 (Id., column 2 line 66 to column 3 line 11). Tsai teaches that the second component comprises a second poly(lactic acid) polymer with a L:D ratio that is greater than the L:D ratio exhibited by the first poly(lactic acid) polymer (Id., column 4 lines 47-54), whose D2 monomers rate is greater than the monomers rate D1 of PLA-1 (Id., Tables 1 and 3, Sample 1, 2).
Tsai teaches that the core further contains a plasticizer (Id., column 7 lines 26-46). Tsai teaches that the plasticizer is present beneficially less than about 7 percent (Id., column 7 lines 26-46). Tsai teaches that the multicomponent fibers comprise biodegradable properties which allow for the fiber to be easily processed (Id., column 1 lines 5-14).
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the polylactic acid components comprise the polylactic acid components as taught by Tsai, motivated by the desire of forming a beverage capsule with multicomponent polylactic acid fibers which are known in the art to be readily degradable in the environment while also being easily and efficiently prepared.
Note that Tsai teaches that the poly(lactic acid) polymer in the first component will have an L:D ratio more beneficially less than about 99.5:0.5 (Tsai, column 5 lines 16-29). Tsai teaches that the poly(lactic acid) polymer in the second component will have an L:D ratio more beneficially at least about 96:4 (Id., column 5 lines 41-53). Note that in the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). The existence of overlapping or encompassing ranges shifts the burden to Applicant to show that his invention would not have been obvious. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
The prior art combination teaches that the fibers are partially drawn during the filter molding process to form a desired depth of filter. The prior art combination does not appear to teach the claimed properties. However, Fu II teaches a process for forming a three-dimensional structure from a non-woven web made of synthetic polymer filaments, such as for use in beverage capsules, comprising subjecting the web to a molding force at a temperature between the glass transition temperature and the melting temperature of the polymer (Fu II, Abstract). Fu II teaches that the nonwoven web may comprise multi-component filaments comprising polylactic acid and have a basis weight in the range of 30 to 200 gsm (Id., paragraphs 0039, 0053-0054). Fu II teaches that the molding step involves an increase in the surface area of the web, such as an increase in the surface area of the web in the range of from 200% to 800% (Id., paragraph 0047). Fu II teaches that an exemplary depth is 34 mm (Id., Fig. 1B). Fu II teaches that the web may have a bonded area formed by thermal bonding (Id., paragraph 0044, claims 1-20). Fu II teaches that the process results in a structure that retains the desired shape and allows control of the pore size distribution of the resulting structure (Id., paragraph 0010).
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the molding step involved an increase in surface area of the web and a depth, such as within the claimed ranges, as taught by Fu II, motivated by the desire of forming a beverage capsule with a molding process known in the art to predictably result in a structure that retains the desired shape and allows control of the pore size distribution of the resulting structure.
The prior art combination teaches that the fabric has a basis weight in the range of 40 to 150 gsm. Additionally, in the process of Fu II, the web is made of filaments having a mean diameter in the range of 5 to 50 µm (Fu II, paragraph 0054).
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the biodegradable multicomponent polylactic acid fibers comprise a diameter, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Fu II, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional beverage capsule comprising fiber diameters known in the art as being predictably suitable for such applications. Note that biodegradable multicomponent polylactic acid fibers comprising a diameter within the claimed range would also comprise a linear density within the claimed range.
The prior art combination does not appear to teach the claimed thickness. However, Mahlich teaches a similar beverage capsule comprising a nonwoven filter element (Mahlich, Abstract). Mahlich teaches that the non-woven is produced from fine plastic fibers, such as polyester fibers, wherein the non-woven has a mass per unit area of between 40 and 100 grams per square meter and a thickness of between 0.20 and 0.8 millimeters (Id., paragraph 0011). Mahlich teaches that the non-woven is preferably stretched and sealed (Id., paragraphs 0012, 0013).
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 beverage capsule of the prior art combination, wherein the nonwoven filter web comprises a thickness, such as within the claimed range, as taught by Mahlich, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional beverage capsule comprising a nonwoven filter web thickness known in the art as being predictably suitable for such applications.
The prior art combination teaches that the fibers are compostable based on ASTM 6400-99 specifications (Noda, paragraph 0059). Alternatively, since the nonwoven of the prior art combination comprises a substantially similar structure and composition as claimed, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill to expect that meeting the claimed biodegradability standard would naturally flow from the invention of the prior art combination. Products of identical structure cannot have mutually exclusive properties. The burden is on Applicants to prove otherwise.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments have been considered but are moot based on the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicants’ amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicants are 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 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