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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8-10, 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brennan, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0134386 in view of Annis, et al, WO 0222352 and Uitenbroek et al, U.S. Patent No. 2008/0076313.
Brennan discloses a wipe. See abstract and paragraph 0058-0063. The wipes can be placed in a container in a stack or in a folded configuration such as c fold or z fold. See paragraph 0063. The wipe can include lotions and ointments. See paragraph 0059. The wipes comprises a nonwoven web comprising fibers having a length of at least about 38 mm. See paragraph 0043. The fibers have a dtex of at least 0.8 dtex and up to about 8 dtex. See paragraph 0044. The fibers can include rayon fibers as well as viscose, lyocell and mixtures thereof. See paragraph 0045. The web can also include pulp fibers. See paragraph 0046. The nonwoven can include less than about 10% of binder. See paragraph 0047. The nonwoven can have a basis weight of 5-200 gsm. See paragraph 0048. The webs can have embossed and compressed areas. See paragraph 0050. Brennan teaches that longer fibers produce softer and more cloth like nonwovens. See paragraph 0043.
Brennan differs from the claimed invention because it does not disclose that a third set of fibers which are either lyocell or viscose can be present having a longer length and a higher dtex.
However, Annis discloses a wipe. The wipes can be premoistened. See page 1, lines 11-20. Annis teaches that wipes are known to be formed from nonwoven fabrics which can include rayon and lyocell fibers. The rayon and lyocell fibers can have a length of 8 mm and a denier of 1.5. See table 3 on page 18. The nonwoven can have a basis weight of 30-90 gsm. See page 12, lines 16-17.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have incorporated both shorter and longer length fibers in the nonwoven of Brennan, in view of the teaching of Annis that shorter fibers having a denier of 1.5 were useful in forming wipes and the teaching of Brennan that longer fibers provided improved softness.
Brennan teaches a range of dtex of from 0.8-8 dtex for the fibers. Additionally, Uitenbroek teaches that the dtex or regenerated cellulose fiers can be selected to provide the desired hand feel of a particular cloth. Utenbroek teaches that higher deniers produce a coarser feel to the fabric. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have selected the particular dtex of the longer fibers in order to provide the desired hand feel to the fabric. Uitenbroek teaches suitable ranges of 0.5 -20. See paragraph 0025.
With regard to the cross-sectional shape of the manmade cellulosic fibers, in the absence of disclosure to the contrary, it is reasonable to expect that the fibers have a round or circular cross-section, because that is the default and most common fiber shape.
With regard to the properties of tensile strength, lotion consumption, elongation , missed dispensings per 22 wipes, it would have been obvious to have provided the wipes so that they had sufficient tensile strength, elongation and missed dispensings so that the wipes had enough tensile strength and elongation to be folded and then successfully removed from the package of wipes once they were folded and disposed in the package. Further, with regard to lotion consumption, since the same types of fibers in the same lengths and dtex are employed to make the wipes, it is reasonable to expect that the wipes would have the claimed lotion consumption, since the wipes of Brennan are intended to include lotion.
Claim (s) 5-7, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brennan et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0134386 in view of Annis, et al, WO 0222352 and Uitenbroek et al, U.S. Patent No. 2008/0076313as set forth above and further in view of Ramaratnam et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0330029.
Brennan discloses a wipe as set forth above.
Brennan differs from the claimed invention because it does not disclose employing regenerated cellulose fibers having a lobed cross section.
However, Ramaratnam discloses incorporating regenerated cellulose fibers such as rayon or lyocell having a lobed, (non-circular), cross section into wipes. See paragraph 0021.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have employed lobed fibers in the wipe in view of their art recognized suitability for the intended purpose.
Applicant’s amendments are sufficient to overcome the previous rejection. A new rejection is set forth above.
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 ELIZABETH M IMANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Wednesday 7AM-7:30; Thursday 10AM -2 PM.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/ELIZABETH M IMANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights