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 .
Examiner Notes
Claims 1 and 3-9 are currently pending of which claim 9 is withdrawn. Claim 1 has been amended.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/31/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishizaki et al. (US 5,985,944) in view of Sugiura (US 2018/0221528).
Regarding claim 1, Ishizaki discloses a water-absorbent resin composition comprising a water-absorbing resin (column 4, lines 10-15).
Ishizaki teaches that various functions may be imparted to the resin by adding e.g., a deodorant (column 19, lines 40-45), however, does not teach addition of a hydrazide compound where the hydrazide compound is at least one selected from the group consisting of malonic acid dihydrazide, succinic acid dihydrazide, adipic acid dihydrazide, carbohydrazide, isophthalic acid dihydrazide, phthalic acid dihydrazide, terephthalic acid dihydrazide, azelaic acid dihydrazide, sebacic acid dihydrazide, oxalic acid dihydrazide, dodecanedioic acid dihydrazide, oxalyl dihydrazide, and adipodihydrazide where the hydrazide compound is only present on an outer surface of the water-absorbing resin.
Sugiura, in the analogous field of odor absorbing compositions (0001) teaches a deodorant composition including a supported hydrazide compound (0055). The hydrazide compounds including oxalic acid dihydrazide, malonic acid dihydrazide, succinic acid dihydrazide, adipic acid dihydrazide, sebacic acid dihydrazide, isophthalic acid dihydrazide, terephthalic acid dihydrazide, and carbohydrazide (0054). The deodorant composition provided adhered to or bonded to the surface of the material (0062).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious for the water-absorbing resin composition of Ishizaki to include a deodorant composition having a supported hydrazide compound only on the outer surface of the resin, as taught by Sugiura, for high deodorizing effect with respect to a complex odor (0025).
Regarding claim 3, Sugiura teaches the hydrazide compound in particulate form (0056).
Regarding claim 4, Sugiura teaches the deodorant composition present in an amount of 0.1 to 20 parts by mass based on parts by mass of the total composition (0067), overlapping the claimed content of 0.001 to 10 mass%.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include 0.01 to 20 parts by mass of the deodorant composition of Sugiura in the water-absorbing resin composition of Ishizaki, to realize the deodorizing effect (0062).
Regarding claim 6, Ishizaki teaches the average particle diameter of the water-absorbing resin of 50 to 1000 µm (column 19, lines 50-55), overlapping the claimed 100 to 600 µm.
Regarding the overlapping ranges in claims 4 and 6, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness, In re Wertheim, 191 USPQ 90, In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1934, and In re Peterson, 65 USPQ2d 1379. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 7, Ishizaki teaches an absorber comprising the resin composition (column 3, lines 39-48).
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishizaki in view of Sugiura as applied to claim 1 or 7 above, and further in view of Murakami et al. (WO2018/150992).
Regarding claim 5, modified Ishizaki discloses the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Ishizaki does not teach an angle of spatula of the particulate water-absorbing resin composition is 20 to 38o.
Murakami, in the analogous field of water-absorbent resin compositions (page 1) teaches a composition with a spatula angle of about 30o (Table 2).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious for the composition of Ishizaki to have a low spatula angle of about 30o as taught by Murakami, for better fluidity (page 12).
Regarding claim 8, modified Ishizaki discloses the limitations of claim 7 as discussed above, however, Ishizaki does not teach the absorber held between a liquid-permeable sheet and liquid-impermeable sheet.
Murakami, in the analogous field of water-absorbent resin compositions (page 1), teaches use of the absorber comprising water-absorbent resin composition held between a liquid-permeable sheet and liquid-impermeable sheet (page 11).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious for the absorber of Ishizaki to be held between a liquid-permeable sheet and liquid-impermeable sheet as taught by Murakami, to make an absorbent article (page 11).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/31/2025 have been fully considered but are moot due to the new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of the new combination of prior art.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALICIA WEYDEMEYER whose telephone number is (571)270-1727. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-4.
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 at 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.
/ALICIA J WEYDEMEYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781