DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s amendment submitted on December 8, 2025 (“amendment”) in response to the Office action mailed on September 9, 2025 (“previous OA”) have been fully considered.
Support for the amendment to claim 1 can be found in the original claim 9.
In view of applicant’s reply on page 5 of the amendment, the objection to the specification as set forth in the previous OA is withdrawn.
In view of the amendment, the objection to claims 2 and 13 is withdrawn.
In view of the amendment, the rejections of claims under 35 USC 112(b) and 35 USC 112(d) as set forth in the previous OA are withdrawn.
In view of the amendment, the rejection of claims 1-19 under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Schmierer et al. (US 20080070053 A1) in view of Mansour et al. (US 20160272856 A1) and as evidence by Technical Data Sheet “Plastolyn 290” and Product Data Sheet “Escorez 5615”), as set forth in the previous OA is withdrawn.
In view of the amendment, a new rejection under 35 USC 103 is introduced.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Vaughan et al. (US 6531544 B1) discloses a block copolymer based adhesive composition for the assembly of the disposable absorbent articles (abstract).
Vaughan is silent as to disclosing a combination of aromatic modified hydrocarbon resin and aromatic hydrocarbon resin as claimed in claims 8 and 15.
He et al. (US 20050182194 A1) discloses a hot melt adhesive containing radial polystyrene-polyisoprene block copolymers (abstract).
He is silent as to disclosing a combination of aromatic modified hydrocarbon resin and aromatic hydrocarbon resin as claimed in claims 8 and 15.
.
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 1-5, 7, 9-14, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaughan et al. (US 6531544 B1) in view of He et al. (US 20050182194 A1) and as evidenced by Technical Data Sheet Plastolyn™240 Hydrocarbon Resin from Synthomer.
As to claim 1, Vaughan discloses a hotmelt pressure sensitive adhesive (HMPSA) for assembly of disposable absorbent articles such as diapers (column 1, lines 5-20).
Further, as to claims 1 and 2, Vaughan discloses an absorbent article having a topsheet, a backsheet, and an absorbent core between the topsheet and the backsheet (column 6, lines 20-30-40). As to the claimed garment-facing surface and a HMPSA composition disposed on the garment-facing surface, the claimed invention does not set forth any specific structure and/or composition of the garment facing surface. A garment facing surface is any surface that directly or indirectly face a garment. The HMPSA of Vaughan as disclosed in column 6 lines 10-40 is used in bonding different components (e.g. topsheet, backsheet, absorbent core) of an absorbent article such that the HMPSA of Vaughan is considered to be disposed on a garment facing surface as claimed.
Further, as to claim 1, Vaughan discloses that the HMPSA comprises from about 15 wt% to 45 wt% of styrenic block copolymer comprising styrene-isoprene-styrene (poly(styrene-b-isoprene-b-styrene)). The claimed range of 10 wt% to 35 wt% of styrenic block copolymer overlaps with the range disclosed by Vaughan such that a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I). Further, Vaughan discloses average styrene content of from about 5 wt% to 45 wt% (column 3, lines 24-25). The claimed average styrene content of 10 wt% to 25 wt% is within the styrene content disclosed by Vaughan such that that a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Further, Vaughan discloses diblock content of from about 20 wt% to about 50 wt%, which is within the claimed range of average diblock content of from 12 wt% to 65 wt% (column 3, lines 40-45, column 4, lines 10-15).
Further, as to claim 1, Vaughan discloses from about 50 wt% to about 80 wt% of at least one tackifying resin (column 2, lines 35-40). Vaughan further discloses that the representative examples of useful hydrocarbon resins include alpha-methyl styrene resins, branched and unbranched C5 resins, C9 resins, dicyclopentadiene based resins, as well as styrenic and hydrogenated modifications of such resins (column 4, lines 60-65).
Further, as to claim 1, Vaughan discloses from about 0 to about 10 wt% of an oil plasticizer (column 2, lines 40-45), up to about 40 wt% of a solid plasticizer, and preferably from about 10wt% to about 20 wt% of solid plasticizer (column 5, lines 35-40). The claimed plasticizer range of from 10 wt% to 40 wt% overlaps or lies within the range disclosed by Vaughan such that prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
As to claim 1, the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art of Vaughan is that Vaughan is silent as to disclosing a hydrogenated hydrocarbon resin having a Mw of at least 900 g/mol.
He discloses hotmelt adhesive for absorbent articles (abstract and 0028). The hotmelt adhesive of He includes styrenic block copolymer (0018) and a tackifier such as alpha-methyl styrene (0021). Further, He discloses Plastolyn 240 as a specific example of the alpha-methyl styrene tackifier (0044). While He does not explicitly mention weight average molecular weight of Plastolyn 240, it is submitted that He and applicant disclose identical hydrogenated HC tackifier resin (see 0050 of the published application disclosing Plastolyn 240). As such, it is clear that Plastolyn 240 of He inherently has the claimed Mw.
Vaughan desires alpha-methyl styrene based tackifier resin (column 4, line 60). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a commercially available tackifier such as Plastolyn 240 of He and use it in the amount disclosed by Vaughan, because Vaughan desires such tackifier and doing so would be obvious for purpose of forming the HMPSA of Vaughan with suitable tack.
As to claim 3, Vaughan as modified by He is silent as to disclosing dioxins.
As to claim 4, Vaughan as modified by He is silent as to disclosing presence of non-hydrogenated C5 resins (also see Examples 1 and 2 of Vaughan).
As to claim 5, Vaughan discloses that the tackifying resin or mixture preferably has a softening point of about 100°C or more (column 4, lines 65-67). Further, Plastolyn 240 HC resin disclosed by Vaughan as modified by He has a R&B softening point value of 120°C (see attached Technical Data Sheet).
As to claim 7, Vaughan as modified by He as set forth previously discloses identical tackifier (Plastolyn 240 or alpha-methyl styrene), which meets claimed aromatic modified or aromatic HC resin.
As to claim 9, Vaughan discloses styrene block copolymer further includes styrene-ethylene/butylene-styrene (column 2, lines 60-61, column 3, lines 1-6).
As to claim 10, Vaughan discloses block copolymer having MFR of less than about 20 g/10 mins as per ASTM 1238 (200°C, 5 kg) (column 3, lines 50-65).
As to claim 11, Vaughan discloses average styrene content of from about 5 wt% to 45 wt% (column 3, lines 24-25) and diblock content of from about 20 wt% to about 50 wt% (column 3, lines 40-45, column 4, lines 10-15).
As to claim 12, Vaughan discloses napthenic oil plasticizer (column 5, lines 30-31).
As to claim 13, Vaughan discloses that the HMPSA comprises from about 15 wt% to 45 wt% of styrenic block copolymer comprising styrene-isoprene-styrene (poly(styrene-b-isoprene-b-styrene)). The claimed range of 10 wt% to 35 wt% of styrenic block copolymer overlaps with the range disclosed by Vaughan such that a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I). Further, Vaughan discloses average styrene content of from about 5 wt% to 45 wt% (column 3, lines 24-25). The claimed average styrene content of 10 wt% to 22 wt% is within the styrene content disclosed by Vaughan such that that a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Further, Vaughan discloses diblock content of from about 20 wt% to about 50 wt%, which is within the claimed range of average diblock content of from 12 wt% to 65 wt% (column 3, lines 40-45, column 4, lines 10-15).
Further, as to claim 13, Vaughan discloses from about 50 wt% to about 80 wt% of at least one tackifying resin (column 2, lines 35-40). Vaughan further discloses that the representative examples of useful hydrocarbon resins include alpha-methyl styrene resins, branched and unbranched C5 resins, C9 resins, dicyclopentadiene based resins, as well as styrenic and hydrogenated modifications of such resins (column 4, lines 60-65).
Further, as to claim 13, Vaughan discloses from about 0 to about 10 wt% of an oil plasticizer (column 2, lines 40-45), up to about 40 wt% of a solid plasticizer, and preferably from about 10wt% to about 20 wt% of solid plasticizer (column 5, lines 35-40). The claimed plasticizer range of from 10 wt% to 40 wt% overlaps or lies within the range disclosed by Vaughan such that prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
As to claim 13 limitation of the hydrogenated HC tackifier having Mw of at last 1,000 g/mol, Vaughan is silent as to disclosing this limitation. However, as set forth previously Vaughan as modified by He discloses identical tackifier as disclosed by present application (Plastolyn 240). As such, Vaughan as modified by He renders obvious this limitation.
As to claim 14, Vaughan as modified by He is silent as to disclosing presence of non-hydrogenated C5 resins (also see Examples 1 and 2 of Vaughan).
As to claims 16 and 19, Vaughan discloses disposable absorbent articles such as feminine protection articles and diapers (column 6, lines 1-20).
As to claim 17, Vaughan discloses average styrene content of from about 5 wt% to 45 wt% (column 3, lines 24-25), which overlaps with the claimed range of 10 wt% to 23.5 wt%.
As to claim 18, Vaughan discloses that the tackifying resin or mixture preferably has a softening point of about 100°C or more (column 4, lines 65-67). Further, Plastolyn 240 HC resin disclosed by Vaughan as modified by He has a R&B softening point value of 120°C (see attached Technical Data Sheet).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaughan et al. (US 6531544 B1) in view of He et al. (US 20050182194 A1) and as evidenced by Technical Data Sheet Plastolyn™240 Hydrocarbon Resin from Synthomer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Malcolm et al. (US 20160068721 A1).
Vaughan as modified by He is silent as to disclosing average aromatic content of the hydrogenated HC tackifying resin.
Malcomn discloses a hotmelt adhesive composition that are useful in disposable absorbent articles (abstract). The hotmelt adhesive of Malcomn includes styrene block copolymers (0035) and a tackifier resin with aromatic content of from about 5% to about 20% by weight (0050), which overlaps with the claimed range of 10 wt% to 25 wt%. Further, Malcomn discloses ESCOREZ series tackifiers (0048), which are identical to the hydrogenated HC tackifiers disclosed by applicant (see 0049 of the published application).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a hydrogenated HC tackifier resin having the claimed aromatic content, which is rendered obvious by Malcomn, in the HMPSA of Vaughan, given that Vaughan desires at least one tackifier, and doing so would be obvious for the purpose of forming the HMPSA of Vaughan with suitable tack so that it can be used to form the absorbent article of Vaughan.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments submitted in the amendment have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ANISH P DESAI whose telephone number is (571)272-6467. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 am ET to 4:30 PM ET.
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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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.
/ANISH P DESAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 February 10, 2026