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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4, 9-12, 14-25, 27-30 are pending, of which Claims 1, 9-12,18-20 are amended, and Claims 27-30 are new. All claims are examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 3/10/2026, with respect to Claim 1 and its dependents, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of Claims 1-4, 9-12, 14-25, 27-28 have been withdrawn.
Claims 29-30 are new and are anticipated/obvious over new reference Autran et al. (US 2007/0287348).
Claim Objections
Claim 29 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Re Claim 29, there is an underscore between “VPLI” and “film” in clause (ii).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 / 203
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Autran et al. (US 2007/0287348, note this is different from the Autran reference used in the last Office Action).
Re Claim 29, Autran discloses a textile backsheet (TBS) having a structure consisting of (see [0049] “In a second embodiment, the BSOC may include the polymeric layer in the form of a polymeric film laminated to the nonwoven material.”):
(i) a nonwoven fabric ([0058]); and
(ii) a vapor-permeable and liquid impermeable (VPLI) film ([0073]), wherein the VPLI film has a total basis weight from about 3 to about 10 gsm ([0068]);
(iii) an adhesive layer positioned between and adjacent each of the nonwoven fabric and the VPLI film, wherein the nonwoven fabric is directl bonded to the VPLI film via the adhesive layer ([0074]-[0075]);
wherein the VPLI film has a MVTR comprising at least about 4000 g/m2/24 hr, the TBS has a MVTR comprising at least about 4000 g/m2/24 hr ([0084] “about 1000 g/m2/24 hr to about 6000 g/m2/24 hr”), or both; and
wherein the TBS has a hydrohead from 80 to 200 mbar ([0083] “up to about 80 mbar”).
It is noted that Autran uses a different method to measure the MVTR (see [0126]) and also uses a different method to measure the hydrohead (see [0125]), but given that Autran’s disclosed MVTR and hydrohead fall within the claimed ranges, it is reasonably expected that Autran’s disclosure either anticipates or at least renders obvious the claimed material properties.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Autran in view of Autran et al. (US 2013/0237938, hereinafter Autran ‘938).
Re Claim 30, Autran discloses claim 29 and further discloses that the VPLI film comprises a multi-layer microporous VPLI film, but does not explicitly disclose wherein each individual layer of the multi-layer microporous VPLI film is formed from an identical polymeric composition. Autran ‘938 discloses a multi-layer film used in a laminate that can be used as an outer cover of an absorbent article, wherein the multi-layer film may comprise layers formed of identical compositions (see [0073] “The B layer, which forms the `core` or `central` layer, may be compositionally identical to the A layers”). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to glean from Autran ‘938 in using identical compositions as this may simplify manufacturing or procurement.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 9-12, 14-25, 27-28 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Applicant arguments filed on 3/10/2026, regarding the deficiencies of Autran et al. (US 2013/0237938), are persuasive. No other prior art reference is found to disclose the inventions of claim 1 or 18. The remaining claims are allowable for depending from either claim.
Autran et al. (US 2007/0287348) discloses a nonwoven that is well outside of the claimed basis weight and therefore also cannot yield a TBS basis weight that falls within the claimed range.
Wenzel (US 2011/0112500) discloses a backsheet ([0104]) having a WVTR of 4000 g/m2/24hr, the backsheet form of a film with a basis weight of 10-40gsm and a nonwoven with a basis weight of 5-20gsm. The film’s basis weight is outside of what is currently claimed and also results in a total backsheet basis weight that is outside of what is currently claimed. Wenzel is silent to an abrasion resistance grade.
LaVon et al. (US 2018/0168874) discloses a backsheet having a WVTR of 4000 g/m2/24hr or greater, wherein the backsheet comprises a film and a nonwoven. LaVon is silent to the basis weight of the nonwoven but discloses a film basis weight well outside of the currently claimed range (e.g., [0548] “backsheet film 126: 12 gsm liquid impermeable polyethylene film”).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
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 SUSAN S SU whose telephone number is (408)918-7575. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 - 5:00 Pacific.
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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at 571-270-5879. 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.
/SUSAN S SU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781 3 April 2026
Prosecution Insights