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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/03/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The claim recites a basis weight as low as 20 gsm, and therefore is broader in scope than its independent claim 1 reciting a lower end of 25 gsm. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: “more1 – 12” should be replaced with “more”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 7, 11 – 13, and 16 – 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lambertz (WO 2020188056) in view of Willhaus (US 20170079858).
1. Lambertz discloses an absorbent article (see Figs. 5 – 10) comprising a liquid pervious topsheet (p. 65, para. 2, p. 47: para. 2) a liquid impervious backsheet (p. 47: para. 2), absorbent material positioned between the liquid pervious topsheet and the liquid impervious backsheet (504, p. 34: para. 1), and a capillary acceleration sheet between the absorbent material and the liquid pervious topsheet (522, Fig. 20b, p. 48: paras. 3 - 4; the sheet exhibits nonwoven capillaries with faster dryness), wherein the absorbent material comprises cellulosic fluff pulp and/or superabsorbent particles (p. 34: para. 1); wherein the absorbent material is arranged on a bottom core wrap sheet (506, Fig. 20a, p. 35: para. 2) such that one or more channels are formed (106, p. 35: para. 2), wherein less absorbent material per surface area is present in the one or more channels compared to an area around the one or more channels (p. 35: para. 2, see also surface area view of channels 106 in Fig. 1), wherein the capillary acceleration sheet has a basis weight between 25 and 55 g/m2 (see p. 74: paras. 2 and 3, sample C’ “carded thermobonded nonwoven layer having… [a] basis weight of 30 g/m^2” discloses the claimed range with sufficient specificity; note also p. 48: para. 4) wherein the capillary acceleration sheet is a carded nonwoven (see p. 48: para. 4, and p. 74: paras. 2 and 3).
However, Lambertz does not disclose that the capillary acceleration sheet comprises fibres having an average diameter between 10 and 35 micron. Nonetheless, Willhaus discloses a capillary acceleration sheet (54, [0035], [0049]) used overtop and in association with an absorbent material superabsorbent core and its channels (see [0029], [0049], Fig. 2), the capillary acceleration sheet being a thermobonded carded nonwoven web having an average diameter between 10 and 35 micron (see [0035 – 0037]; polypropylene denier 3.0 is 21.6 microns and denier 7.0 is 33.3 microns, see applicant provided NPL dated 05/01/2026 “Choosing The Proper Short Cut Fiber”; it is noted that polyethylene has a volumetric density similar to polypropylene and inclusive of 0.91 g/mL, see provided NPL “Polyethylene”). Therefore, according to the teachings of Willhaus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the capillary acceleration fibres of Lambertz within applicant’s claimed fibre diameter for the benefit a standard fibre diameter used in a capillary acceleration sheet imbuing the requisite strength, rewet, and other qualities expected of the nonwoven.
2. The modified Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1. Lambertz discloses that the channels may be formed by replacing the core wrap and performing bonding via the topsheet, which may be joined indirectly (see Lambertz, p. 38, para. 4). However, Lambertz does not explicitly disclose wherein the capillary acceleration sheet is attached to the bottom core wrap sheet at least in a portion of the one or more channels.
Nonetheless, Willhaus discloses that the core wrap may be partially formed by layers such as the capillary acceleration sheet, see [0042]. Therefore, according to the teachings of Willhaus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to replace the top core wrap of Lambertz with the capillary acceleration sheet for the benefit of cost savings using less materials, and because such materials are known to provide stable bond formation and are used in association with the channels.
Upon providing the modification as described, the capillary acceleration sheet is attached to the bottom core wrap sheet of Lambertz at least in a portion of the one or more channels.
3. The modified Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 2, wherein no additional sheet is present between the absorbent material and the capillary acceleration sheet (see discussion in claim 2 above, it would have been obvious to replace the top core wrap of Lambertz with the capillary acceleration sheet as illustrated in Fig. 20a; thus, neither the core wrap sheet nor any additional sheet would be present).
4. The modified Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, wherein the capillary acceleration material extends over a full surface area of channels above the bottom core wrap sheet, see Fig. 17a. However, Lambertz does not disclose wherein the absorbent material extends over a surface area of the bottom core wrap sheet, and wherein the capillary acceleration sheet extends over the full surface area of the absorbent material.
Nonetheless, Willhaus discloses wherein the absorbent material extends over a surface area of the bottom core wrap sheet (see Fig. 3), and wherein the capillary acceleration sheet extends over the full surface area of the absorbent material (see Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the article of Lambertz according to the capillary acceleration sheet extension of Willhaus for the benefit of ensuring acquisition and distribution of liquid throughout the entire extent of the absorbent core for appropriate liquid retention therein.
5. The modified Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, wherein the channels may be formed by replacing the top core wrap and performing bonding to an upper sheet (see Lambertz, p. 38, para. 4). However, Lambertz does not disclose wherein the capillary acceleration sheet is attached along a periphery to the bottom core wrap sheet.
Willhaus furthermore discloses that the core wrap may be partially formed by layers such as the capillary acceleration sheet, see [0042], where the upper sheet thus be attached along a periphery to the bottom core wrap sheet (see Figs. 4a and 4b). Therefore, according to the teachings of Willhaus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to replace the top core wrap of Lambertz with a capillary acceleration sheet bonded to the bottom core wrap sheet periphery for the benefit of cost savings using less materials, and because such materials are known to provide stable bond formation to securely hold absorbent core material.
6. The modified Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, further comprising a top core wrap sheet arranged between the capillary acceleration sheet and the absorbent material, wherein the top core wrap sheet is attached to the bottom core wrap sheet at least in a portion of the one or more channels (see Fig. 20b, 505). Lambertz furthermore discloses wherein an upper sheet is attached indirectly to a bottom sheet in at least a portion of the one or more channels (see Lambertz, p. 38, para. 4). However, Lambertz does not explicitly disclose wherein the capillary acceleration sheet is attached to the top core wrap sheet in at least a portion of the one or more channels.
Nonetheless, Willhaus discloses the capillary acceleration sheet is contacted to the top core wrap sheet in at least in a portion of the one or more channels, see Fig. 2, [0049]. Therefore, according to the teachings of Willhaus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the indirectly attached upper sheet of Lambertz by attaching the capillary acceleration sheet to the top core wrap sheet for the benefit of forming channel ditches in the overlapping acceleration sheet, thus increasing contact and fluid distribution to the liquid retention layer.
7. Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, wherein the capillary acceleration sheet has a basis weight between 20 and 40 g/m2 (see p. 48: para. 4, where p. 74: paras. 2 and 3, sample C’ “carded thermobonded nonwoven layer having… [a] basis weight of 30 g/m^2” discloses the claimed range with sufficient specificity).
11. The modified Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the topsheet has a basis weight between 10 and 30 g/m2; and/or wherein the topsheet is any one of the following: a spunbond nonwoven, a through air bonded carded web (TABCW); and/or wherein the fibres of the topsheet have an average fineness between 1-3 dtex; and/or wherein at least a portion of the topsheet is bonded to the capillary acceleration sheet.
Willhaus discloses wherein the topsheet has a basis weight between 10 and 30 g/m2; and/or wherein the topsheet is any one of the following: a spunbond nonwoven, a through air bonded carded web (TABCW); and/or wherein the fibres of the topsheet have an average fineness between 1-3 dtex; and/or wherein at least a portion of the topsheet is bonded to the capillary acceleration sheet, see [0032]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the topsheet of Lambertz according to the topsheet qualities of Willhaus for the benefit of a suitable material known in the art for use thereof.
12. Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, wherein the bottom core wrap sheet has a first and second longitudinal edge and a first and second transverse edge and wherein the one or more channels comprise at least one elongate channel extending from a crotch region in the direction of the first and/or second transverse edge (see Fig. 1).
13. The modified Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, wherein the one or more channels comprise one or more attachment zones where the upper sheet is attached to the back core wrap sheet; wherein the one or more attachment zones are formed by any one of the following or a combination thereof: pressure bonding, thermal bonding, sonic bonding, chemical bonding, adhesive (see p. 38, para. 4).
However, Lambertz does not disclose wherein the one or more channels comprise one or more attachment zones where the capillary acceleration sheet is attached to the back core wrap sheet. Nonetheless, Willhaus discloses that the core wrap may be partially formed by layers such as the capillary acceleration sheet, see [0042]. Therefore, according to the teachings of Willhaus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to replace the attached top core wrap of Lambertz with the capillary acceleration sheet for the benefit of cost savings using less materials, and because such materials are known to provide stable bond formation and are used in association with the channels.
Upon providing the modification as described, the one or more channels comprise one or more attachment zones where the capillary acceleration sheet is attached to the back core wrap sheet.
16. Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, wherein a width of the one or more channels, seen in a transverse direction of the bottom core wrap sheet, is at least 1 mm (see p. 28, para. 2).
17. Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, wherein the one or more channels comprise any one or more of the following: one or more permanent attachment zones, one or more semi-permanent attachment zones configured to release after having been in contact with liquid, one or more unattached zones (p. 38, para. 3).
18. Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, wherein the one or more channels comprise a first channel and a second channel which extend next to each other and are each extending in the direction of a first and/or second transverse edge of the bottom core wrap sheet, wherein the first and second channel are oriented substantially in a longitudinal direction of the bottom core wrap sheet (see Fig. 18b, Fig. 14); and wherein the capillary acceleration sheet at least partially covers the first and second channel (see Fig. 17a – 17g).
19. Lambertz discloses the absorbent article of claim 18, wherein the one or more channels further comprise a third and a fourth channel located at a distance of each other and at a distance of the first and second channel, said third and fourth channel each extending in the direction of the first and/or second transverse edge; and wherein the capillary acceleration sheet at least partially covers the third and fourth channel (see Fig. 17g, front and back sets of 106); wherein the bottom core wrap sheet has a front portion extending at one side of a transverse crotch line and a rear portion extending at the other side of the transverse crotch line (see Fig. 17g, where the line would run through point Cc); wherein the first and second channel extend at least in the front portion of the bottom core wrap sheet; and wherein the third and fourth channel extend at least in the rear portion of the bottom core wrap sheet (see Fig. 17g).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lambertz (WO 2020188056) in view of Willhaus (US 20170079858) in view of Isele (US 20110196325).
8. Lambertz in view of Willhaus discloses the absorbent article of claim 1, where about 3 denier includes embodiments with an average diameter overlapping 20 micron (between 2 and 3 denier overlaps 20 microns, which is within the bounds of “about” 3 denier), but does not explicitly disclose the fiber particle distribution, and so does not disclose wherein the capillary acceleration sheet comprises a blend of first fibres having an average first diameter above 20 micron, and second fibres having an average second diameter below 20 micron, wherein the first fibres represent less than 45 weight %, and wherein the second fibres represent more than 55 weight % of the capillary acceleration sheet. Nonetheless, Isele discloses a nonwoven having an average fiber diameter in the range of 10 to 20 microns, with a relative standard deviation in the range of 4% to 10%, see [0107]. As an example, an 18 micron fiber having a relative standard deviation of 10% would produce a distribution range in which 84.1% of the fibers have a diameter below 20 microns (10% standard deviation of 18 microns means that one standard deviation or 84.1% of the fibers have a micron size of 18 + 0.1*18, adding up to 19.8 microns or around 20 microns, so that 15.9% of the fibers would have a fiber size above 20 microns) and 15.9% of the fibers have a diameter above 20 microns (see above). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the fiber distribution of Lambertz in view of Willhaus, according to the teachings of Isele, in order to produce the fiber distribution range as claimed, for the benefit of specifically tailoring the pore size of the capillary acceleration sheet to achieve the desired performance without wasting material on fibers that would undesirably impact the material, see [0110].
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lambertz (WO 2020188056) in view of Willhaus (US 20170079858) in view of Rosati (US 20170258650).
10. Lambertz discloses he absorbent article of claim 1, and Willhaus additionally discloses designing the capillary acceleration sheet with good rewet, see [0037], but does not disclose wherein the capillary acceleration sheet comprises a fraction of fibres having an average diameter which is at least 10% lower than an average diameter of fibres of the liquid pervious topsheet. Nonetheless, Rosati discloses that a capillary acceleration sheet comprising fibers having an average diameter which is lower than the average diameter of fibers from the liquid pervious topsheet results in better dewatering the pores of the topsheet, see [0180]. Thus,
according to the teachings of Rosati, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to optimize fiber diameter between the topsheet and capillary acceleration sheet of the modified Lambertz so the capillary acceleration sheet is at least 10% lower than an average diameter of fibres of the liquid pervious topsheet. One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that providing the modification within applicant's claimed range would result in improved dewatering and rewet. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 14, and 15 are allowed. The claims in the instant application have not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose or suggest all the features of the claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Lambertz in view of Willhaus, the closest prior art of record, fails to render obvious the claimed combination of a capillary acceleration sheet having a basis weight between 30 and 55 gsm and comprising fibres having an average diameter between 17 and 27 micron, the capillary acceleration sheet being a spundbond nonwoven made from continuous polypropylene fibres and attached to the bottom core wrap sheet at least in a portion of the one or more channels, wherein no additional sheet is present between the absorbent material and the capillary acceleration sheet. While Lambertz discloses that the acquisition distribution layer may be a spunbonded nonwoven and may have a basis weight of 10 to 50 gsm, see p. 48, para. 4, Lambertz does not disclose that the basis weight is used specifically for the spunbonded nonwoven itself, much less one attached to the bottom core wrap sheet with no additional sheet present. In fact, provided examples suggest a lower basis weight for the spunbonded material, see p. 71, last paragraph. Willhaus references larger basis weights in association with the carded rather than spunbonded nonwoven, see [0037].
Willhaus additionally makes reference to Kirby in paras. [0090], [0033]. Kirby (US 20140121623) discloses lower basis weights in association with the spunbonded nonwoven capillary acceleration sheet, see [0114]. It is noted that the transfer layer 78 disclosed at the end of [0114] is a 33 gsm laminate that includes a spunbonded nonwoven of 12 gsm. However, the laminate is a hydraulically entangled nonwoven rather than being a spunbonded nonwoven, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims.
The examiner lastly references Busam (US 20040097895), provided in the previous final action dated 01/05/2026. Busam discloses a spunbonded nonwoven having a basis weight up to 30 gsm, with higher basis weights associated with acquisition material carded nonwovens, see [0063, 0064].
As such, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a spunbonded nonwoven capillary acceleration sheet attached to absorbent material channels at the elevated basis weights of 30 to 55 gsm as found in claims 9, 14, and 15. The claims thus patentably define over the closest prior art of reference.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 9, 14, and dependents therein 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY H PHILIPS whose telephone number is (571)270-5180. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F.
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, Brandy Lee can be reached at (571) 270-7410. 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.
/BRADLEY H PHILIPS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights