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
Applicant’s arguments filed 13 July 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3 and 7-15 under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, the amendment to claim 1 raises issues resulting in a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 112.
Applicant's arguments filed 13 July 2026 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3 and 7-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to Applicant’s argument that Ong does not disclose the claimed size dimension of the absorbent core, it is noted that Ong discloses in figures 6 and 8 an embodiment in which the absorbent core is significantly smaller than the size dimension of the absorbent article.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3 and 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The limitation “surrounding areas around the absorbent core are transparent or translucent” is not disclose in the specification as originally filed. While it is unclear what layer of the article comprises the claimed “surrounding areas” as described in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) below, the present specification does not appear to disclose any of the layers of the article as being transparent or translucent in surrounding areas around the absorbent core. Paragraphs [0020] and [0039] of the present specification are cited as providing support for the claim limitations, but neither discloses “surrounding areas” that are transparent or translucent. The limitation therefore constitutes new matter.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3 and 7-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "surrounding areas around the absorbent core" in line 24. It is unclear what layer of the article comprises the surrounding areas, and therefore the scope of the claim is indefinite.
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) 1-3, 6, and 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ong et al. (9,675,501) in view of Bianchi et al. (10,864,119).
With respect to claim 1, Ong discloses a feminine pad absorbent article, as shown in figure 1, comprising a perimeter defined by first and second transverse end edges 12 and 14, and an opposing pair of longitudinal direction side edges 16 and 18. A topsheet layer 30 extends to the perimeter and forms the perimeter and has an area defined by the perimeter 110, as shown in figures 1, 6, and 8. The topsheet material is opaque, as disclosed in column 14, lines 7-10, and a body facing surface and an absorbent core facing surface, as shown in figure 2. A plurality of openings extend through the topsheet and provide an open space within an area of the topsheet, as disclosed in column 11, lines 24-33. A backsheet layer 32 comprises a backsheet material that is transparent, as disclosed in column 12, lines 42-46, which is inherently less opaque than the opaque topsheet and has an opacity of 0%. An absorbent core 113 is positioned between the topsheet and backsheet, as shown in figure 8. The absorbent core comprises a combination of cellulosic fluff and superabsorbent particles, as disclosed in column 16, lines 19-30. The backsheet is transparent, and therefore is considered to anticipate the limitation “surrounding areas around the absorbent core are … transparent through the plurality of openings and the backsheet layer” as best understood by Examiner.
Ong discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of the topsheet material having an opacity of at least 40%, a size dimension of the absorbent core being 15-60% of a size dimension of the article, and the absorbent core having a body facing layer that comprises the through-air bonded carded web material and a garment facing layer that comprises the cellulosic pulp.
Ong discloses in column 14, lines 7-10, that the topsheet should have sufficient opacity to mask the layer below. Bianchi discloses an absorbent article having a topsheet with an opacity of up to 75%, as disclosed in column 11, lines 60-61. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the topsheet of Ong with an opacity of 75%, as taught by Bianchi, to achieve the predictable result of a topsheet that is capable of masking.
Ong further discloses that the absorbent core 113 has a significantly smaller area that the periphery 110 of the article, as shown in figure 6, to provide a centrally located fluid disposition area that allows for edge leakage prevention, as disclosed in column 16, lines 1-41. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the absorbent core of Ong with a size dimension that is 15-60% of the size dimension of the article, since Ong teaches a significantly smaller absorbent core area to achieve a centrally located fluid disposition area that allows for edge leakage prevention.
Through-air bonded carded webs and compressed sheets of cellulose pulp are well-known materials for use in absorbent cores. Bianchi discloses an absorbent article having an absorbent core comprising a body facing layer 52 and a garment facing layer 28, as shown in figure 2. The body facing layer 52 comprises a through-air bonded carded web material, as disclosed in column 15, lines 61-63. The garment facing layer 28 comprises a sheet of cellulose, as disclosed in column 18, lines 27-30. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the through-air bonded carded web material of Ong a body facing layer and the garment facing layer from a sheet of cellulose pulp, as taught by Bianchi, to achieve the simple substitution of a known element for another to obtain the predictable result of an absorbent core that effectively acquires and absorbs liquid. The limitation “compressed” is considered to be a product-by-process limitation that does not distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art.
With respect to claim 2, Ong discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of the topsheet material having an opacity of at least 45%. Ong discloses in column 14, lines 7-10, that the topsheet should have sufficient opacity to mask the layer below. Bianchi discloses an absorbent article having a topsheet with an opacity of up to 75%, as disclosed in column 11, lines 60-61. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the topsheet of Ong with an opacity of 75%, as taught by Bianchi, to achieve the predictable result of a topsheet that is capable of masking.
With respect to claim 3, the backsheet of Ong is transparent, and therefore has an opacity of 0%.
With respect to claim 6, modified Ong discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of a size dimension of the absorbent core being 15-60% of a size dimension of the absorbent article. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the absorbent core of Ong with a size dimension of 15-60% of the size dimension of the article to achieve the predictable result of an absorbent core that covers a sufficient area of the article to effectively absorb fluids.
With respect to claim 10, Ong discloses a secondary absorbent layer, as disclosed in column 17, lines 31-37, and column 18, lines 45-47.
With respect to claim 11, modified Ong discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of the secondary absorbent layer being positioned between the absorbent core and the backsheet layer. Ong discloses in column 11, lines 45-50, that a secondary absorbent layer, or surge or transfer layer, can be positioned below the primary absorbent material. Positioning a transfer layer between an absorbent core and a backsheet of an absorbent article is well-known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the secondary absorbent layer of Ong between the absorbent core and the backsheet to achieve the predictable result of allowing surges of fluid to be redistributed throughout the absorbent core.
With respect to claims 12-13, modified Ong discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of the secondary absorbent layer having an opacity of less than 25%. Ong discloses in column 18, lines 45-50, that the secondary absorbent layer should be opaque enough to mask the staining of the layers below. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the opacity of the secondary absorbent layer of Ong with an opacity of up to 25% to achieve the predictable result of making the layer opaque enough to mask stains.
With respect to claims 14-15, modified Ong discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of the absorbent core having an opacity of at least 45%. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the absorbent core of Ong with an opacity of at least 45% to achieve the predictable result of preventing the sight of fluids absorbed by the absorbent core to be visible.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ong et al. (9,675,501) in view of Bianchi et al. (10,864,119), and further in view of Arora et al. (2016/0136014).
With respect to claim 7, modified Ong discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of the topsheet containing from 15-40% of open space. Ong discloses in column 11, lines 24-25, that larger open areas are desired, but remains silent as to the exact amount of open space. Arora discloses a perforated topsheet material, and discloses in paragraph [0238] that the open space of an apertured topsheet is from 15-30%. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the topsheet of Ong to contain from 15-40% of open space, as taught by Arora, to achieve a breathable topsheet.
With respect to claims 8-9, Ong discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of each opening having a size dimension greater than 0.3 mm2 or 0.7 mm2. Ong discloses in column 11, lines 30-33, that the openings should be wide to allow exudates to flow quickly through, but remains silent as to the exact dimensions. Arora discloses in paragraph [0239] that the size dimension of the openings in the topsheet are at least 0.3 mm2 or 0.7 mm2. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the openings of Ong with a size dimension of at least 0.3 mm2 or 0.7 mm2, as taught by Arora, to achieve the predictable result of apertures that are sized appropriately to allow exudates to quickly flow through the topsheet.
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 LYNNE ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at 571-272-7159. 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.
/CATHARINE L ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights