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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/10/2025 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.
Claim(s) 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciallella et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,806,261).
Regarding claim 10: Ciallella discloses a method of packaging a flexible, dissolvable, porous article comprising the steps of:
a) providing a flexible, dissolvable, porous article comprising a water-soluble polymer and a surfactant (Fig. 1; via detergent composition 19), surfactant selected from the group consisting of alkylalkoxy sulfates, linear alkyl benzene sulphonates, sodium trideceth sulfates, alkyl alkoxylated alcohols, alkyl alkoxylated phenols, alkyl polysaccharides, polyhydroxy fatty acid amides, alkoxylated fatty acid esters, sucrose esters, sorbitan esters and alkoxylated derivatives of sorbitan esters, amine oxides, DEQA compounds, and combinations thereof (via “The particulate detergent composition…alkyl benzenes”);
b) placing one or more of said flexible, dissolvable, porous articles into a fluid- impermeable package (Fig. 1; via CMC paper 11/11’ and/or PVA covering paper 13/13’ and/or further the entire shown packet article 10 is further packed in numbers via “Bartelt Flexible Packet Packager”);
c) applying a vacuum force to said flexible, dissolvable (via “before boxing or cartooning the packets may be inserted in reclosable polyethylene or other suitable porches, preferably of the press-resealable type”, and
d) sealing said fluid-impermeable package with the compressed flexible, dissolvable, porous articles inside (Fig. 1; via 15/17).
Ciallella may not be specific about the exact ranges of the claimed flexible, dissolvable, porous article to be characterized by a 50% Compression Force of less than 100,000 N/m2 when measured at 25°C with an equilibrium humidity of 40%; the porous articles to achieve a Volumetric Compression of 20% or more;
A percent open cell content of from about 80 – 99%;
An overall average pre size of from about 100 – 1000
µ
m;
An average cell wall thickness of from about 5 – 200
µ
m;
A basis weight of from about 50 – 500 grams/m^2;
A density of from about 0.05 – 0.5 grams/cm^3; nor
A specific surface area of from about 0.03 – 0.25 m^2/g.
Ciallella clearly concerned and addressed some relationship between the applied pressing force to the packed article and the surrounding temperature (“washing temperatures of 10 degree C and 38 degree C are used and gentle (six minutes), permanent press” and/or “temperatures do not exceed 100 degree C at atmospheric pressure”) along with other article descriptions, but not the exact claimed ratios and/or ranges per the amended claim 10 on 02/27/2025.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have modified Ciallella’s packaging method to be at different pressing/temperature ranges and/or the other claimed article characterization ranges as suggested by the claimed invention, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Further, Ciallella suggest a surfactant to be consisting of alkyl benzenes; “The particulate detergent composition…alkyl benzenes”), which is an element of the claimed “group” to be selected from “selected from the group”.
Being that said, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have modified Ciallella’s packaging method by using any of the claimed materials or combination, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 11: Ciallella does not suggest the exact claimed flexible, dissolvable, porous article is characterized by a Percent Open Cell Content of from about 80% to about 99%, and an Overall Average Pore Size of from about 200 pm to about 600 pm. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have modified Ciallella’s packaging method to disclose the flexible, dissolvable, porous article characterized by a Percent Open Cell Content of from about 80% to about 99%, and an Overall Average Pore Size of from about 200 pm to about 600 pm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 12: Ciallella may not suggest the claimed flexible, dissolvable, porous article is characterized by a maximum dimension D and a minimum dimension z; and wherein the ratio of D/z ranges from about 2 to about 7. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have modified Ciallella’s packaging method to disclose that the flexible, dissolvable, porous article is characterized by a maximum dimension D and a minimum dimension z; and wherein the ratio of D/z ranges from about 2 to about 7, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 13: Ciallella discloses that the flexible, dissolvable, porous article comprises multiple flexible, dissolvable, porous sheets (Abstract; “such compression a sheet or sheets”), each of which has a different thickness ranging than the claimed one to be from about 0.8 mm to about 2 mm; wherein said article comprises from about 6 to about 30, of said flexible, dissolvable, porous sheets. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have modified Ciallella’s packaging method to have the flexible article with specific thickness to be from about 0.8 mm to about 2 mm; wherein said article comprises from about 6 to about 30, of said flexible, dissolvable, porous sheets, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 14: Ciallella does not disclose the exact claimed ranges of the flexible, dissolvable, porous article comprises from about 10% to about 30%, of said water-soluble polymer by total weight of said article; wherein said water-soluble polymer has a weight average molecular weight of from about 80,000 to 150,000 Daltons; and comprises a polyvinyl alcohol characterized by a degree of hydrolysis ranging from about 70% to about 90%. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have modified Ciallella’s packaging method to have the flexible, dissolvable, porous article comprises from about 10% to about 30%, of said water-soluble polymer by total weight of said article; wherein said water-soluble polymer has a weight average molecular weight of from about 80,000 to 150,000 Daltons; and comprises a polyvinyl alcohol characterized by a degree of hydrolysis ranging from about 70% to about 90%, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 15: Ciallella does not suggest the exact range of the flexible, dissolvable, porous article comprises from about 40% to about 80%, of said surfactant by total weight of said article. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have modified Ciallella’s packaging method to have the flexible dissolvable, porous article comprises from about 40% to about 80%, of said surfactant by total weight of said article, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
It is noted that the applied art of Ciallella suggested the claimed steps and structural limitations of the packed article, but may not be suggesting the exact claimed ranges. As set forth above, since the claimed steps and similar packed articles just with different structural values and ranges suggested by Ciallella, coming up with further different values or ranges is only a matter of discovering the best fit optimum or workable ranges, which involves only a routine skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 10-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection adjusted to address the newly added limitations.
In respect to the filed arguments that the applied art does not suggest the limitations of the amended claim 10. As set forth above, the Office believes that since the applied art of Ciallella ‘261 suggests the claimed method of packaging a flexible, dissolvable, porous article; coming up with the exact claimed ranges of the article and/or a use of specific content of the material, would be nothing more than a design choice to be made and/or it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMEH TAWFIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4470. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Shelle Self can be reached on 571-272-4524. 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.
/SAMEH TAWFIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights