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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/09/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant filed a Request for Continued Examination on12/09/2025. However, arguments were not filed with the request, thus the examiner address arguments and amendments filed with the Amendment After Final filed on 11/14/2025.
Applicant has amended claim 1 to recite "wherein at least a portion of the meltblown fibers each comprise a homogenous mixture of a first thermoplastic material and a hydrophilic additive that have been melted together to form the mixture, and the mixture extruded and blown to form the meltblown fibers". Applicant argues at least a portion of the meltblown fibers each comprise a homogenous mixture of a first thermoplastic material and a hydrophilic additive that have been melted together to form the mixture. Because these fibers have been made of the mixture of the first thermoplastic material and the hydrophilic additive, they have uniform properties throughout. Applicant argues in contrast, in Riddell a first secondary stream is formed containing staple fibers and merged with the first primary stream so that the first primary stream includes the staple fibers entangled with the meltblown fibers. Further, the staple fibers in Riddell do not penetrate the meltblown thermoplastic fibers and the material of the staple fibers is not any part of a mixture of the material forming the meltblown fibers. Rather, Riddell only teaches entangling two separate types of fibers and not creating a single type of fibers that are created from a mixture of the two separate components, a first thermoplastic material and a hydrophilic additive. Applicant argues the fact that in Riddell the fibers are not made from a mixture of the two different components, or even that the staple fibers do not penetrate the meltblown thermoplastic fibers is also supported by the disclosure that the particulate material, when heated, penetrates into the fibers, which are then entangled with the wood fibers (paragraph 0036). Applicant argues nowhere in Riddell is it stated that the staple fibers penetrate into the thermoplastic fibers. In this regard, claim 1 requires that the particulate material is dispersed among the meltblown fibers, not embedded within them. Even though the limitation of a hydrophilic additive being melted together to form a mixture is directed to a process of making the article, the examiner does agree that the resulting meltblown fiber is one that requires a hydrophilic additive as part of the fiber. This limitation is addressed below with new art Goldwasser et al. US Patent Application Publication 2004/0043685 who teaches meltblown fibers extruded with hydrophilic additives.
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.
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.
Claims 1-11 and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Riddell US Patent Application 2002/0017354 (USPN 6494974) in view of Goldwasser et al. US Patent Application Publication 2004/0043685.
As to claim 1, Riddell teaches a composite web 89, comprising:
- a mass of meltblown fibers comprising at least a first, melted and blown
thermoplastic material – where Riddell teaches the first primary stream 42 includes meltblown fibers where the method includes using a molten polymeric material (Riddell Figure 1; paragraph 0035).
In paragraph 0031, Riddell incorporates by reference Boggs USPN 4707398 who teaches processing enhancing additives may be mixed with the polymeric material prior to its introduction into the hopper (Boggs col. 7, lines 64-67), however, Boggs is not specific as to the processing enhancing additives being hydrophilic additives. Goldwasser teaches meltblown fibers with a hydrophilic surfactant additive in an extrusion melt during formation of fibers (Goldwasser Abstract). Goldwasser teaches the polyolefin material from which the extruded filaments are made is hydrophobic in nature. Goldwasser teaches an additive is incorporated into the extrusion polymeric melt so as to act as an internal additive to the polymeric material and render the material and the nonwoven made therefrom hydrophilic in nature (Goldwasser para. 0029). Goldwasser teaches when the polypropylene is utilized with the preferred additive, advantageous results are obtained including the maintenance of fluid transport properties while maintaining barrier properties. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to modify the thermoplastic material of Riddell with a hydrophilic additive for the benefits taught in Goldwasser since both are from the same field of endeavor and provide meltblown fibers for absorbent products (Goldwasser para. 0020).
Riddell/Goldwasser teaches the composite web further comprising
- a particulate material dispersed among the fibers and at least partly adherent
thereto – where Riddell teaches a second meltblown unit 130 forms a second layer 82, which includes meltblown fibers, and wood or other staple fibers and additionally includes a first tertiary stream 170 of heated particles to merge with the second primary stream 142. Riddell teaches upon merging with the second primary stream 142, portions of the heated particles from the first tertiary stream impact and penetrate into the skin of one or more solidifying meltblown fibers and become embedded in and retained by one or more meltblown fibers (paragraphs 0007-0008, 0036, 0038),
wherein the first thermoplastic material is an elastomer (paragraph 0045) and the particulate material comprises an absorbent or superabsorbent material (paragraph 0048).
As to claim 2, the elastomer is present in the fibers in a percentage between 5% and 30% by weight – where .Riddell teaches the coform web may vary between about 10% meltblown fibers and about 90% wood fiber, and about 90% meltblown fibers and about 10% wood fibers (Riddell paragraph 0044) – which has values of the elastomer fibers in the claimed range of 5% and 30% by weight.
As to claims 3 and 16, wherein the hydrophilic additive is present in a percentage between 1% and 10% by weight, preferably in a percentage between 3% and 6% by weight – where Riddell teaches the coform web may vary between about 10% meltblown fibers and about 90% wood fiber, and about 90% meltblown fibers and about 10% wood fibers (Riddell paragraph 0044) – which has values of the elastomer fibers in the claimed range of 1% and 10% by weight.
As to claim 4, Riddell teaches the particulate material is present with a gram weight of between 8 and 990 gsm – where Riddell teaches for a panty liner containing particulate material, the particulates can be incorporated in the meltblown web in amounts ranging from about 0.5 to about 30 gsm (Riddell paragraph 0076).
As to claim 5, Riddell/Goldwasser does not specifically the mass of meltblown fibers comprises a second thermoplastic material present in a percentage between 70% and 95% by weight. Riddell does teach the composite web may be formed from a wide variety of thermoplastic fiber-forming polymers so that the webs can be fashioned with different physical properties by the appropriate selection of polymers or combinations thereof (Riddell paragraph 0045). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to provide a second thermoplastic material in the web to achieve desired physical properties of the web as taught in Riddell (paragraph 0045). Riddell further teaches the coform may vary between 10 and 90% meltblown fibers (Riddell paragraph 0044).
As to claims 6 and 18, Riddell in paragraph 0031 incorporates by reference Buntin, USPN 3849241. Buntin teaches a melt-blowing process where the fiber-forming thermoplastic resins have melt flow rates of about 55, which has values in the claimed range of between 1 and 2000 and includes the claimed melt flow rate of 1200.
As to claims 7 and 19, Riddell in paragraph 0031 incorporates by reference Buntin, USPN 3849241. Buntin teaches a melt-blowing process where the fiber-forming thermoplastic resins have melt flow rates of about 55, which has values in the claimed range of between 1 and 2000, and includes the claimed range of a melt flow rate of 1200.
As to claims 8 and 20, in paragraph 0034, Riddell incorporates by reference Anderson et al. USPN 4100324 who teaches the meltblown fibers have an average fiber diameter of less than about 10 microns (Anderson Abstract), which have values in the claimed range of between 0.1 microns and 30 microns in diameter and includes the claimed range of between 0.5 microns and 10 microns in diameter.
As to claim 9, in Example 6, Riddell teaches the coform has a basis weight of 170 grams per square meter (Example 6, paragraph 0123). Riddell also teaches the pulp/polymer ratio is 70/30 (Example 6, paragraph 0122). Thirty percent of 170 gsm is 51 gsm by weight of the composite, which has values in the claimed range of 0.1gsm and 300 gsm
As to claim 10, Riddell teaches the composite web having a gram weight of between 50 and 1500 gsm – where Riddell teaches the coform is 170 gsm (Riddell paragraph 0090).
As to claim 11, Riddell teaches a first layer 80 includes wood fibers entangled with nonparticle-containing meltblown fibers. A second layer 82 includes wood fibers entangled with particle-containing meltblown fibers and wood fibers from each layer are intermingled (Riddell Figures 2 and 3; paragraph 0040). Riddell further teaches a at least one auxiliary web 84 coupled to the mass of meltblown fibers in which the particulate material is dispersed (Figure 4).
As to claim 14, Riddell teaches the auxiliary web and/or the first web of non-woven fabric and/or the second web of non-woven fabric and the mass of meltblown fibers are bonded without adhesive materials (Riddell paragraph 0032) – where Riddell teaches some of the meltblown fibers and wood fibers of the second layer 82, when laid down, become somewhat intermingled with meltblown fibers and wood fibers of the first layer 80 along a formation line 85 (Figures 1 and 2; paragraph 0036).
As to claim 15, Riddell teaches an absorbent article (Riddell Figures 9 and 10; paragraphs 0019-0020, 0058) comprising a piece of a composite web according to claim 1.
As to claim 17, Riddell teaches the amount of particles included in the meltblown web can depend on the particular use to be made of the web. Riddell teaches that in the present invention, particles may be added in any amount from a very minimum to an upper range which would be the amount that would stay in the web without causing the web to lose its integrity. Riddell teaches the particles may be about 0.1 to about 80 percent, by weight, of the layer containing the particles (paragraph 0051). Riddell for a panty liner containing particulate material, the particulates can be incorporated in the meltblown web in amounts ranging from about 0.5 to about 30 gsm (paragraph 0076). While this amount falls below the claimed between 50 and 700gsm, Riddell provides motivation for modifying the amount of particles in the composite web depending on the end use of the product. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to determine through routine experimentation the amount of particulate material needed for a particular absorbent product.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riddell USPN 6494974 in view of Goldwasser et al. US Patent Application Publication 2004/0043685and further in view of Baer US Patent Application Publication 2004/0243080.
As to claim 12, Riddell/Goldwasser teaches the auxiliary web comprises a first web 84 of meltblown or spunbond (paragraph 0041). Riddell/Goldwasser does not specifically teach the basis weight of the nonwoven fabric of the first web 84. Baer teaches absorbent pads having nonwoven fabric laminates generally including at least two layers: a spunbond layer and a meltblown layer (Abstract) Baer teaches the spunbond layer 20 has a basis weight ranging from about 10 to 20 gsm (Baer paragraph 0026). Riddell/Goldwasser teaches the meltblown layer 18 has a basis weight in the range of 1.25 and 20 gsm (Baer paragraph 0022). Both the spunbond and meltblown webs of Baer have basis weights within the claimed range of between 1 gsm and 20 gsm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to provide the auxiliary web of Riddell/Goldwasser with the claimed basis weight in the nonwoven fibers since Riddell/Goldwasser and Baer are from the same field of endeavor, absorbent articles with meltblown fiber layers.
As to claim 13, Riddell/Goldwasser/Baer teaches a second web 22 (Baer Figure 2) of non-woven fabric, which Baer teaches can be a carded through-air-bonded nonwoven (Baer paragraph 0027), having a basis weight ranging from 10 to 20 gsm (Baer paragraph 0026), which has values in the claimed range of between 10 gsm and 300 gsm.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACQUELINE F STEPHENS whose telephone number is (571)272-4937. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00.
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, 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.
/JACQUELINE F STEPHENS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781