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 Amendment
The Amendment filed September 10th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-19 and claims 21-22 are pending in the application. Claim 20 has been canceled. Claim 22 is newly added.
The rejection of claims 1-2, 4-8, 12, 18-19 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mort III (US 20180216038 A1) and Ogar (US 4765916 A) is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 9-11, 13-16, and 18-19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mort III (US 20180216038 A1), Ogar (US 4765916 A), and Fujiwara (JP 2003041471 A) is withdrawn.
The rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mort III (US 20180216038 A1), Ogar (US 4765916 A), and Kimura (JP 2000314067 A) is withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the solid formulation" in line 9 and “the woven or nonwoven fabric” in line 12. Please amend for proper support.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-8, 12, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mort III (US 20180216038 A1) in view of Bridewell (WO 2020219930 A1), as evidenced by Thermo Scientific (“Polyethylene glycol, 4,000”).
With regard to claims 1-5, 7, 12, and 21, Mort III discloses a rheology modified detergent particle comprising a surfactant and specific functional rheology modifier (see [0001]). Mort III further discloses polyethylene glycol having a molecular weight of 4000-12,000 Da as a rheology modifier (see [0005]) at 0.5-20wt% (see [0012]). Mort III further discloses the particle may comprise 10-80wt% of detergent builder (see [0025]). Polyethylene glycol having a molecular weight of 4000 Da has a melting point of 58oC to 62oC (see Thermo Scientific, Specifications).
However, Mort III fails to disclose a woven or nonwoven pouch formed of water-soluble fibers, wherein the pouch is configured to dissolve in wash water.
Bridewell discloses a nonwoven web, said nonwoven web including a plurality of fibers including a blend of fiber forming materials, the blend of fiber forming materials including a first polyvinyl alcohol polymer (see Abstract). Bridewell further teaches the blend of fiber forming materials further comprises a second polyvinyl alcohol polymer or does not include carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose or starch (see Abstract). Bridewell further discloses the nonwoven web may optionally be water-soluble (see Abstract). Bridewell further discloses the pouch may be formed by the nonwoven web being folded in half on itself, two of the non-folded sides heat sealed, and the pouched filled before the final opening is also heat sealed (see [0398]). Bridewell further teaches the disclosed are pleasant to handle, quickly release the pouch contents to provide a more homogeneous distribution, and can remain water-soluble after storing in contact with the pouch contents while having a reduced tendency to stick to other water-soluble packaging (see [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to utilize the pouch of Bridewell with the composition of Mort III for the purpose of providing a pouch which is pleasant to handle, quickly release the pouch contents to provide a more homogeneous distribution, and can remain water-soluble after storing in contact with the pouch contents while having a reduced tendency to stick to other water-soluble packaging, as disclosed by Bridewell.
With regard to claim 6, Mort III discloses the rheology modifier as ethylene oxide-propylene oxide-ethylene oxide triblock copolymer (see [0016]).
With regard to claim 8, Mort III discloses the particle size distribution as such that the D50 is greater than about 150 microns to less than 1700 microns (see [0022]).
Claims 9-11, 13-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mort III (US 20180216038 A1), in view of Bridewell (WO 2020219930 A1), as evidenced by Thermo Scientific (“Polyethylene glycol, 4,000”), as applied to claims 1-8, 12, and 21 above, and further in view of Fujiwara (JP 2003041471 A).
With regard to claims 9-11 and claims 14-16, Mort III and Bridewell disclose all of the limitations of claim 1.
However, Mort III and Bridewell fail to disclose a ratio of the average particle size to the average pore size of greater than 1.6 (claim 9), less than 50 (claim 10), and 6 to 35 (claim 11).
Fujiwara teaches a nonwoven polyvinyl alcohol fabric (Abstract) as packaging materials for detergents (see [0052]). Fujiwara further teaches the fabric to have an average pore size of 1 to 200 microns (see Claim 9) for the purpose of shape and quality stability (see [0046]). Fujiwara further discloses if the average pore size exceeds 200 microns, the nonwoven fabric becomes coarse (see [0046]). Fujiwara further discloses a PVA homopolymer fabric that is water-soluble at temperatures of 50oC or higher (see [0006]).
With respect to the ratio of average particle size to average pore size of 1.6 or greater (claim 9), less than 50 (claim 10), and 6 to 35 (claim 11) considering that Mort III discloses the particle size distribution as such that the D50 is greater than about 150 microns to less than 1700 microns as disclosed in [0022] and Fujiwara teaches a pore size in the range of average pore size of 1 to 200 microns (see Claim 9), the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the range disclosed by the references (e.g. a particle size of 150 micrometers and a pore size of 25 micrometers; a ratio of 6:1) because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness, see In re Malagari, 182 U.S.P.Q 549; In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936-37 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). In addition, a prima facie case of obviousness exists because the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art", see In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257,191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976; In re Woodruff; 919 F.2d 1575,16USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05(I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to utilize the pore size of Fujiwara with the film disclosed by Bridewell to produce a texture which is not coarse, as disclosed by Fujiwara.
With regard to claim 13, Mort III and Bridewell teach all of the limitations of claim 1.
However, Mort III and Bridewell are silent as to the air permeability of the pouch.
Fujiwara teaches a nonwoven polyvinyl alcohol fabric (Abstract) as packaging materials for detergents (0052). Fujiwara further teaches an air permeability of that fabric of 1-400 cc/cm2/sec [claim 9] for the purpose of maintaining quality and shape stability (0046). This range of air permeability corresponds to a range of 1.97 to 787.4 ft3/ft2/min, as shown in the formula below.
1
c
m
3
c
m
2
s
e
c
x
1
f
t
3
28316.08
c
m
3
x
929.03
c
m
2
1
f
t
2
x
60
s
e
c
1
m
i
n
=
1.97
f
t
3
f
t
2
/
s
e
c
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the nonwoven fabric pouch of Bridewell to contain the air permeability range as disclosed by Fujiwara for the purpose of maintain shape and quality stability.
With regard to claim 18 and claim 19, Mort III discloses a rheology modified detergent particle comprising a surfactant and specific functional rheology modifier (see [0001]). Mort III further discloses polyethylene glycol having a molecular weight of 4000-12,000 Da as a rheology modifier (see [0005]) at 0.5-20wt% (see [0012]). Mort III further discloses the particle may comprise 10-80wt% of detergent builder (see [0025]). Polyethylene glycol having a molecular weight of 4000 Da has a melting point of 58oC to 62oC (see Thermo Scientific, Specifications). Mort III further discloses the rheology modifier as ethylene oxide-propylene oxide-ethylene oxide triblock copolymer (see [0016]).
However, Mort III fails to disclose a woven or nonwoven pouch formed of water-soluble fibers, wherein the pouch is configured to dissolve in wash water.
Bridewell discloses a nonwoven web, said nonwoven web including a plurality of fibers including a blend of fiber forming materials, the blend of fiber forming materials including a first polyvinyl alcohol polymer (see Abstract). Bridewell further teaches the blend of fiber forming materials further comprises a second polyvinyl alcohol polymer or does not include carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose or starch (see Abstract). Bridewell further discloses the nonwoven web may optionally be water-soluble (see Abstract). Bridewell further discloses the pouch may be formed by the nonwoven web being folded in half on itself, two of the non-folded sides heat sealed, and the pouched filled before the final opening is also heat sealed (see [0398]). Bridewell further teaches the disclosed are pleasant to handle, quickly release the pouch contents to provide a more homogeneous distribution, and can remain water-soluble after storing in contact with the pouch contents while having a reduced tendency to stick to other water-soluble packaging (see [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to utilize the pouch of Bridewell with the composition of Mort III for the purpose of providing a pouch which is pleasant to handle, quickly release the pouch contents to provide a more homogeneous distribution, and can remain water-soluble after storing in contact with the pouch contents while having a reduced tendency to stick to other water-soluble packaging, as disclosed by Bridewell.
However, Mort III and Bridewell fail to disclose a ratio of the average particle size to the average pore size of greater than 1.6 (claim 9), less than 50 (claim 10), and 6 to 35 (claim 11).
Fujiwara teaches a nonwoven polyvinyl alcohol fabric (Abstract) as packaging materials for detergents (see [0052]). Fujiwara further teaches the fabric to have an average pore size of 1 to 200 microns (see Claim 9) for the purpose of shape and quality stability (see [0046]). Fujiwara further discloses if the average pore size exceeds 200 microns, the nonwoven fabric becomes coarse (see [0046]). Fujiwara further discloses a PVA homopolymer fabric that is water-soluble at temperatures of 50oC or higher (see [0006]).
With respect to the ratio of average particle size to average pore size of 1.6 or greater (claim 9), less than 50 (claim 10), and 6 to 35 (claim 11) considering that Mort III discloses the particle size distribution as such that the D50 is greater than about 150 microns to less than 1700 microns as disclosed in [0022] and Fujiwara teaches a pore size in the range of average pore size of 1 to 200 microns (see Claim 9), the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the range disclosed by the references (e.g. a particle size of 150 micrometers and a pore size of 25 micrometers; a ratio of 6:1) because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness, see In re Malagari, 182 U.S.P.Q 549; In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936-37 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). In addition, a prima facie case of obviousness exists because the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art", see In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257,191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976; In re Woodruff; 919 F.2d 1575,16USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05(I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to utilize the pore size of Fujiwara with the film disclosed by Bridewell to produce a texture which is not coarse, as disclosed by Fujiwara.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mort III (US 20180216038 A1), in view of Bridewell (WO 2020219930 A1), as evidenced by Thermo Scientific (“Polyethylene glycol, 4,000”), as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Kimura (JP 2000314067 A).
With regard to claim 17, Mort III and Bridewell teach all of the limitations of claim 1.
However, Mort III and Bridewell are silent as to the pouch configured to have a basis weight of about 5 gsm to about 150 gsm.
Kimura teaches a polyvinyl alcohol based nonwoven fabric (Abstract) with a basis weight of 50 g/m2 (0054) as a packaging material for detergents (0043).
Both Bridewell and Kimura teach nonwoven fabrics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the pore sizes disclosed by Kimura with the nonwoven polyvinyl alcohol fabric as taught by Bridewell as Kimura shows that such pore sizes can be used in nonwoven polyvinyl alcohol based fabrics used in packaging material.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mort III (US 20180216038 A1) in view of Bridewell (WO 2020219930 A1), as evidenced by Thermo Scientific (“Polyethylene glycol, 4,000”), as applied to claims 1-8, 12, and 21 above, and further in view of Klemm (US 4659496 A).
With regard to claim 22, Mort III and Bridewell disclose all of the limitations of claim 1.
However, Mort III and Bridewell fail to disclose the woven or nonwoven fabric formed of water-soluble fibers as having a porosity of greater than about 10,000 ml/min/cm2.
Klemm discloses a dispensing pouch containing premeasured laundry compositions (see Abstract). Klemm further discloses the pouch may be nonwoven and may comprise spun-bonded polypropylene, polyethylene, polyester, polyvinyl chloride, cellulose acetate, polyacrylic, or other materials possessing similar properties, which will be known by those skilled in the art (see Col 3 line 58-63). Klemm further discloses such pouches as having a texture which does not substantially abrade typical fabrics laundered by machine washers and dryers (see Col 3 line 9-12). Klemm further discloses said fabric porosity permits the passage of water and of said fabric softener/antistatic when it is in its melted condition, but normally preventing passage of either of said first laundry additive and said fabric softener/antistatic (see Claim 22). Klemm further discloses the pouch may be a single piece of porous fabric that is formed into a rectangular pouch by wrapping it around a hollow vertical mandrel and ultrasonically heat sealing a vertical or longitudinal line of joinder where the two longitudinal edges of the fabric overlap (see Col 4 line 10-14).
While Klemm fails to disclose a porosity of greater than about 10,000 ml/min/cm2, Klemm discloses the pouch may have a porosity of between about 150 cubic feet per minute per square foot and about 300 cubic feet per minute per square foot, said fabric porosity permitting passage of water (see Claim 22). This corresponds to approximately 4572 ml/min/cm2 to 9144 ml/min/cm2. A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties, see Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778F.2d 775,227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2144.05 I.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the polyvinyl alcohol pouch of Bridewell to comprise a porosity of 4572 ml/min/cm2 to 9144 ml/min/cm2, as taught by Klemm, for the purpose of producing a pouch that does not substantially abrade typical fabrics laundered by machine washers and dryers, as disclosed by Klemm.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-19 and claims 21-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that Ogar is directed to a rinse-release delivery system, and the pouch must remain intact throughout the wash (regardless of temperature) and dissolves only in the rinse due to a pH-triggered mechanism (see col. 2, line 50 to col. 3, line 20). A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the present application would have recognized that the delayed released required with Ogar was fundamentally incompatible with the composition from Mort III where any pouch enclosing the composition must dissolves in wash water. The person of ordinary skill in the art thus would have found no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to modify Mort III so that its composition for dissolution in wash water was contained in a polymer film configured according to the rinse-release system of Ogar. Applicant further argues that Ogar requires a film laminate.
As Ogar is no longer relied upon as prior art, Applicant’s arguments regarding Ogar are moot.
As stated above, Bridewell discloses a nonwoven web, said nonwoven web including a plurality of fibers including a blend of fiber forming materials, the blend of fiber forming materials including a first polyvinyl alcohol polymer (see Abstract). Bridewell further teaches the blend of fiber forming materials further comprises a second polyvinyl alcohol polymer or does not include carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose or starch (see Abstract). Bridewell further discloses the nonwoven web may optionally be water-soluble (see Abstract). Bridewell further discloses the pouch may be formed by the nonwoven web being folded in half on itself, two of the non-folded sides heat sealed, and the pouched filled before the final opening is also heat sealed (see [0398]). Bridewell further teaches the disclosed are pleasant to handle, quickly release the pouch contents to provide a more homogeneous distribution, and can remain water-soluble after storing in contact with the pouch contents while having a reduced tendency to stick to other water-soluble packaging (see [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to utilize the pouch of Bridewell with the composition of Mort III for the purpose of providing a pouch which is pleasant to handle, quickly release the pouch contents to provide a more homogeneous distribution, and can remain water-soluble after storing in contact with the pouch contents while having a reduced tendency to stick to other water-soluble packaging, as disclosed by Bridewell.
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 BRITTANY SHARON HARRIS whose telephone number is (571)270-1390. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/B.S.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/LORNA M DOUYON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
