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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 14 November 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claim amendments filed 14 November 2025 are acknowledged. Claims 3, 15-17, and 19-20 are pending with claims 1-2, 4-14, and 18 being cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 4-6 of the applicant’s response, filed 14 November 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Itoi in view of Fukatsu.
In light of the inclusion of previously claims 13 and 14 into independent claim 3 and the addition of limitation “a water absorption amount of physical saline of the water-absorbent resin is 10 g/g or more”, claim 3 now stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 using Itoi as the primary reference with Fukatsu as a supporting reference. Itoi teaches all aspects of independent claim 3 as presented in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 19 February 2025 and the Final Office Action mailed 18 June 2025 including the new limitation a water absorption amount of physical saline of the water-absorbent resin is 10 g/g or more (0.4g of water-absorbent resin was swollen with 46 g of physiological saline, paragraph [0055]), but does not disclose the ratio of the nitrogen-containing five-member ring compound is 100 to 300 parts by mass with respect to 100 parts by mass of the silver zeolite. However, as discussed in the Final Office Action mailed 18 June 2025, Fukatsu teaches said ratio (ratio of the organic antibacterial agent to the inorganic antibacterial agent is 2:1 by mass, paragraph [0149]). Therefore, a combination of Itoi and Fukatsu would render the current invention obvious.
In response to applicant's argument that the teachings of Itoi and Fukatsu are technically incompatible, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In response to applicant's argument that the cited prior art does not explicitly teach the effects of improved deodorization and yellowing suppression, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). It should also be noted that the properties of a chemical composition are inherent. Therefore, since the composition of Itoi and Fukatsu is indistinguishable from that of the current application, it can be presumed that any properties or features of the composition would be the same in both (See MPEP 2112.01 I).
Following the above logic, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections of claims 16-17 and 19-20 are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Itoi in view of Fukatsu. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 15 is withdrawn, but upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Itoi and Fukatsu in view of Taniguchi.
The rejections of claims 13-14 are withdrawn due to the claims being cancelled.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3, 16-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoi (JP 2010194254 A) in view of Fukatsu (US 20080138385 A1).
Regarding claim 3 Itoi teaches a deodorant composition (paragraph [0001]), comprising: silver zeolite (paragraph [0025]); a nitrogen-containing five-member ring compound (one nitrogen atom in a ring such as pyrrole, paragraph [0032]); and a water-absorbent resin (composed of water-absorbent resin, paragraph [0017]), wherein the water absorbent resin is in the form of a particle (water-absorbent particles, paragraph [0075]); a water absorption amount of physical saline of the water-absorbent resin is 10 g/g or more (0.4g of water-absorbent resin was swollen with 46 g of physiological saline, paragraph [0055]), the water-absorbent resin has a structural unit derived from an ethylenically unsaturated monomer (crosslinkable vinyl monomer, paragraph [0030]), and the ethylenically unsaturated monomer contains at least one selected from the group consisting of (meth)acrylic acid and a salt thereof (vinyl monomer includes (meth) acrylate, paragraph [0033], metal salt used to make the copolymer, paragraph [0037]), but does not teach a content of the nitrogen-containing five-member ring compound is 100-300 parts by mass with respect to 100 parts by mass of the silver zeolite. However, Fukatsu teaches a content of the nitrogen-containing five-member ring compound is 100-300 parts by mass with respect to 100 parts by mass of the silver zeolite (ratio of the organic antibacterial agent to the inorganic antibacterial agent is 2:1 by mass, paragraph [0149], organic antibacterial agent as an imidazole-based organic antibacterial agent, paragraph [0023], and the inorganic antibacterial agent as zeolite having supported thereon silver, paragraph [0024]).
Itoi and Fukatsu are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of antibacterial deodorizing compositions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the deodorant composition taught by Itoi with the nitrogen-containing compound to silver zeolite ratio taught by Fukatsu because Fukatsu teaches such a ratio allows for a synergistic antibacterial effect between the inorganic and organic components (paragraph [0150]).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Itoi and Fukatsu teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the nitrogen-containing five-members ring compound contains a benzimidazole compound. However, Fukatsu further teaches wherein the nitrogen-containing five-members ring compound contains a benzimidazole compound (cyclic benzimidazole compound derivatives, paragraph [0085]).
Itoi and Fukatsu are considered analogous to the current invention as described above. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the deodorant composition taught by Itoi and Fukatsu with a benzimidazole compound because Fukatsu teaches the lack of halogen will prevent dioxin from forming during disposal of the composition (paragraph [0085]).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Itoi and Fukatsu teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the nitrogen-containing five-membered ring compound contains thiabendazole. However, Fukatsu further teaches wherein the nitrogen-containing five-membered ring compound contains thiabendazole (thiabendazole is the organic antibacterial agent, abstract).
Itoi and Fukatsu are considered analogous to the current invention as described above. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the deodorant composition taught by Itoi and Fukatsu with a thiabendazole compound because Fukatsu teaches the lack of halogen will prevent dioxin from forming during disposal of the composition (paragraph [0085]).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Itoi and Fukatsu teaches an absorber comprising the deodorant composition according to claim 3 (absorbent body disposed between sheets, paragraph [0014], Itoi).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Itoi and Fukatsu teaches an absorbent article comprising the absorber according to claim 19 (absorbent core in a disposable diaper, paragraph [0012]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoi and Fukatsu in view of Taniguchi (US 20060189953 A1).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Itoi and Fukatsu teaches all aspects of the current invention as described above except wherein a content of the silver zeolite is 50 to 1000 ppm based on the total mass of the water-absorbent resin. However, Taniguchi teaches wherein a content of the silver zeolite is 50 to 1000ppm based on the total mass of the water-absorbent resin (100g of water-absorbing resin and 0.025g of silver zeolite (250ppm silver zeolite), paragraph [0031]).
Itoi, Fukatsu, and Taniguchi are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of antibacterial deodorizing compositions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the deodorizing composition taught by Itoi and Fukatsu with the ratio of silver zeolite to water-absorbent resin taught by Taniguchi because Taniguchi teaches this ratio balances the antibacterial property of the metal while retaining economical value (paragraph [0020]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAYLA ROSE SARANTAKOS whose telephone number is (703)756-5524. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00-4:00.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/K.R.S./
Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/DONALD R SPAMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799