Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/908,314

Elastic Bicomponent Fiber Having Unique Handfeel

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 31, 2022
Examiner
ZHANG, MICHAEL N
Art Unit
1781
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kimberly-Clark Worldwide Inc.
OA Round
7 (Non-Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allow Rate
212 granted / 396 resolved
-11.5% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
454
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
57.1%
+17.1% vs TC avg
§102
8.2%
-31.8% vs TC avg
§112
27.3%
-12.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 396 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/08/2025 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Claim 1, 3-6, 8-9, 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novarino et al. (US 2020/0248347 A1) in view of Harrington et al. (US 2009/0124154 A1) and Peng (US 2009/0111347 A1). Regarding Claim 1, 8-9 and 11, Novarino teaches an elastic bicomponent fiber in a sheath-core configuration (Abstract; Paragraph 0030), where the core can comprise a polypropylene elastomer with slip additives. (Paragraph 0016-0022, 0032, 0095). Novarino teaches the propylene-based elastomer can be an ethylene/propylene copolymer. (Paragraph 0016-0017). Novarino teaches secondary amides can be used as slip agents. (Paragraph 0094-0095). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use slip agents described as suitable as polypropylene for the core polypropylene elastomer. Novarino teaches the sheath can comprise 5 to 20 wt% of the fiber. (Paragraph 0045). This lies within the claimed range of less than 50 wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05). Novarino does not specifically teach the propylene/ethylene copolymer comprises ethylene comonomer in the amount of 1 to 20 wt%. Harrington teaches an elastomeric composition for use a core material in a bicomponent fiber, for a resulting soft touch bicomponent fiber. (Abstract; Claim 1 of Harrington; Paragraph 0077). Harrington teaches a core composition comprises a first propylene/ethylene elastomer comprising at more than 7 wt% of ethylene comonomer and a second propylene/ethylene elastomer of less than 7 wt% of ethylene comonomer (Claim 1 of Harrington). These range overlaps the claimed range. Harrington teaches blending polypropylene elastomers together can allow for adjustment and tailoring of desirable properties, such as tensile strength and elastic properties (Paragraph 0002, 0006, 0064, 0111-0112). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use multiple propylene/ethylene elastomers with differing ethylene content as the core composition of Novarino to allow for adjustment of desired physical properties as taught by Harrington. Novarino teaches the slip additive can be erucamide, oleamide, and stearyl derivatives, fatty acid amides. (Paragraph 0097). However, both erucamide and oleamide are not considered secondary amides, but primary amides. Peng teaches elastomeric polypropylene fibers (Abstract; Claim 1) with slip additives. (Paragraph 0080-0085) Peng teaches the slip additives can be primary or secondary fatty acid amides, including palmitamide, stearamide, arachidamide, behenamide, oleamide, erucamide, linoleamide, stearyl stearamide, palmityl palmitamide, stearyl arachidamide and mixtures thereof. (Paragraph 0082) Peng also recites Formula (1) with overlapping R groups. (Paragraph 0082). Peng teaches these slip additives can ensure proper bonding strength and avoid problems during production. (Paragraph 0078). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use the claimed fatty acid secondary amides recited by Peng as the slip additives in Novarino to ensure proper bonding strength and avoid problems during production of the polypropylene fibers. Novarino does not require the sheath is required to have a slip additive; therefore, the sheath can be considered to be free of a secondary amide. (Paragraph 0032). Furthermore, there are four finite number of core/sheath bicomponent fiber combination as shown below: Slip Additive in Core/Slip Additive in Sheath Slip Additive in Core/No Slip Additive in Sheath No Slip Additive in Core/Slip Additive in Sheath No Slip Additive in Core/No Slip Additive in Sheath Therefore, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it “obvious to try” to reach the claimed combination as are there are finite number of identified, predictable combinations. (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007)). Novarino teaches the slip agent can be present from 0.1 to 5 wt% based on the polypropylene. (Paragraph 0098). This overlaps the claimed range of about 0.5 to about 1%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use the same claimed range in the polypropylene elastomer core, as Novarino teaches this range is suitable for polypropylene. Novarino teaches the sheath can comprise 5 to 20 wt% of the fiber. (Paragraph 0045). As Novarino teaches the wt% of the slip additive in the core and the wt% of the core to the entire fiber, then Novarino teaches a range the overlaps the claimed range for the amount of secondary amide present in the entire bicomponent fiber, along with Peng teaching the use of the secondary amide as the slip agent. Novarino, Harrington and Peng do not teach the resulting bicomponent fiber has the claimed cup crush bending stiffness and burst peak load. Novarino, Harrington and Peng teach the composition for the core and sheath and teach the secondary amide and secondary amide concentration in the fiber and in the core, as discussed above. Thus, as Novarino, Harrington and Peng teaches the same composition and structure as the claimed invention, it would be reasonable to one with ordinary skill in the art that the fiber of Novarino, Harrington and Peng to inherently have the same physical properties, including the cup crush bending stiffness and burst peak load. “Where…the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, the PTO can require an applicant to prove that the prior art products do not necessarily or inherently possess the characteristics of his claimed product. Whether the rejection is based on “inherency” under 35 USC 102, on “prima facie obviousness” under 35 USC 103, jointly or alternatively, the burden of proof is the same, and its fairness is evidenced by the PTO's inability to manufacture products or to obtain and compare prior art products. (MPEP §2112). Regarding Claim 3, Novarino teaches the sheath can comprise LLDPE or LDPE, which are non-elastomeric polymers. (Paragraph 0023-0024). Regarding Claim 4, Novarino teaches the sheath can comprise LLDPE or LDPE. (Paragraph 0023-0024). Regarding Claim 5-6, Novarino teaches the slip agent, secondary amide, can be present from 0.1 to 5 wt% based on the polypropylene. (Paragraph 0098). This overlaps the claimed range of about 0.6 to about 1 wt% and about 0.75 wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05). Regarding Claim 13, Novarino teaches the sheath can comprise 5 to 20 wt% of the fiber. (Paragraph 0045). This lies within the claimed range of less than or equal to 40 wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05). Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novarino, Harrington and Peng, in further view of Tallury et al. (US 2022/0049389 A1) Regarding Claim 12, Novarino does not specifically teach the presence of pigment particles. Tallury teaches a bicomponent sheath-core (Claim 18 of Tallury) comprising a propylene-based elastomer. (Abstract) Tallury teaches additives, including pigment can be added to the propylene-based elastomer. (Paragraph 0054-0056). Tallury teaches amount of additive can be from 1 to 5 wt% of the polymer. (Paragraph 0056). This overlaps the claimed range of 0.1 to 5 wt%. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to add pigment to the propylene elastomer, the core, to the claimed range to add color to the core fiber component. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered. A new ground of rejection has been made in view of Applicant’s amendments. Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 9:30am-3:30pm, 8:30PM-10:30PM. 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, Frank Vineis can be reached on (571) 270-1547. 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. /Michael Zhang/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 31, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 29, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 28, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 09, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 12, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 16, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 12, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 14, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 18, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 11, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 05, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 05, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 08, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600113
FLEXIBLE COVER WINDOW WITH IMPROVED STRENGTH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600117
HYBRID ROOFING MEMBRANE AND METHODS OF MAKING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576621
ADHESIVELESS THERMALLY LAMINATED BARRIER HEAT SEALING FILMS INCLUDING POLYETHYLENE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565723
Fabric with Flow Restricting Core
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558878
BI-DIRECTIONALLY ORIENTED MULTILAYER FILM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+25.9%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 396 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month