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 .
Response to Arguments
Claims 9 and 17 are cancelled. Claims 1-8, 10-16, and 18-21 are pending. Claims 20 and 21 have been indicated as allowed.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8, 10-16, and 18-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson et al. USPN 5643240 in view of Waksmundzki et al. US 20030208176.
As to claim 1, Jackson teaches an absorbent garment 10 comprising:
a chassis including opposing front and rear waist portions (Fig. 1), a crotch portion – narrowed width area - extending longitudinally between the front and rear waist portions (Fig. 1);
a topsheet 12 having a film layer 22 defining a plurality of apertures 24 (col. 3. lines 33-41), and
a backsheet 14;
the topsheet 12 including:
an apertured region having percentage of open area greater than or equal to 10% (col. 2 lines 41-42); and
a non-apertured region surrounding the apertured region – which includes the longitudinal ends and the periphery of the topsheet (Fig. 1 and 2).
Jackson teaches percent open area is calculated by specifying a unit area, calculating the surface area of all open areas within the specified unit area, dividing this total open area by the total surface area within the specified unit area, and then multiplying the quotient by 100 to yield percent open area (Jackson col. 3, line 64 through col. 4, line 2). As Jackson teaches percent open area includes calculating all open areas, a non-apertured region of Jackson would not have a percent open area and thus, the percent open area of the non-apertured region would be zero, which meets the claim limitation of a non-apertured region includes a percentage of open area less than two percent.
Jackson further teaches an absorbent core 16 disposed between the topsheet 12 and the backsheet 14, at least a portion of the absorbent core 16 positioned in the crotch portion.
Jackson teaches a separation layer 26 disposed underneath the topsheet 12 (Fig. 1 and 2; col. 3, lines 33-36). Jackson teaches the separation layer 26, performs the function of an acquisition/distribution layer in that the separation layer 26 is in direct contact with the apertured film layer 22 and readily desorbs fluid from the surface of the sanitary napkin and transfers it to the absorbent core 26 (col. 4, lines 35-40). Jackson does not teach a rectangular acquisition-distribution layer (ADL) or that an ADL boundary is spaced inward from front and rear ends of the absorbent core. Waksmundzki teaches a disposable absorbent article having a fluid acquisition system (Waksmundzki Abstract). Waksmundzki teaches a rectangular shaped acquisition-distribution layer (ADL) 136 having a boundary spaced inward from front and rear ends of the absorbent core 36 (Waksmundzki Fig. 5-11; paras. 0058-0060). Waksmundzki teaches the ADL 136 is preferably located at the insult zone as best seen in Fig. 5 (para. 0059). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to modify the acquisition-distribution layer of Jackson to have a rectangular shape and be positioned inboard of the absorbent core front and rear edges as taught in Waksmundzki since both are from the same field of endeavor and solve the same problem of directing fluids towards the core. Additionally, a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In Re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
Jackson/Waksmundzki teach at least 75% of the plurality of apertures 24 are defined within an apertured region that is disposed vertically above the ADL 26 (Jackson Fig. 2) and is enclosed within the ADL boundary when the chassis is in a flat configuration (Jackson Fig. 2); and wherein an area of the apertured region is between 75% and 95% of the area of the ADL 26 - where Jackson teaches the apertures 24 may be localized or they may extend across the entire surface of the film layer 22 as shown in Fig. 1 (col. 3, lines 42-44), in which case, the apertured region would at least be 75% of the area of the ADL 26.
As to claim 2, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches the apertured region (region with apertures 24) overlies at least a majority of the ADL 26 (Jackson Fig. 2).
As to claim 3, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches the aperture region (region with apertures 24) overlies an entirety of the ADL 26 (Jackson Fig. 2).
As to claim 4, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches 95% of the plurality of apertures 24 are defined within an apertured region (Jackson Figure 1).
As to claim 5, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches an underlying ADL, but does not specifically teach the width and length of the apertured region with respect to the width and length of the ADL 26. Jackson does teach the plurality of apertures 24 and the areas containing apertures (apertured region) can be varied - where Jackson teaches the apertures may be localized or they may extend across the entire surface of the film layer 22 as shown in Fig. 1 (Jackson col. 3, lines 42-44). Jackson further teaches the size and number of apertures can be varied depending upon the viscosity and other properties of the body fluid being transported through the film layer (Jackson col. 4 lines 2-5). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to provide an aperture size and apertured region consistent with the fluid management requirements of a particular absorbent article. One having ordinary skill in the art would be able to determine through routine experimentation the ideal size of the width and length of the apertured region with respect to the width and length of the ADL for effective transport of fluids to the ADL.
As to claim 8, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches the topsheet 12 includes only a single apertured region (Jackson Figure 1).
As to claim 10, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches when the aperturing is localized, it will typically be in the form of a longitudinal central portion or strip which separates two side portions of the cover which are not apertured (Jackson col. 3, lines 44-47), in which case, the non-apertured region spans at least a majority of the topsheet.
As to claim 11, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches the external edges includes: two widthwise edges extending in a first direction; and two lengthwise edges extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction ( Jackson Figure 1).
As to claim 12, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches the topsheet 12 includes a liquid-permeable nonwoven (Jackson col. 3, lines 33-36); and the backsheet 14 includes a liquid impermeable material (Jackson col. 3, lines 27-32).
Claims 6, 7, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson et al. USPN 5643240 in view of Waksmundzki et al. US 20030208176 and further in view of Warren et al. US Patent Application Publication 2005/0154362.
As to claims 6 and 7, Jackson/Waksmundzki teach the present invention substantially as claimed. Jackson/Waksmundzki does not teach the apertured region is positioned closer to the first end (of the chassis) than the second end or that at least a majority of the apertured region is disposed in a front half of the chassis. Warren teaches an absorbent article having a topsheet 14 with a portion 20 having a plurality of apertures 24 that can be disposed nearer one end of device 10 than the other end (Warren Fig. 2; para. 0019) for the benefit of capturing fluids that progress toward a longitudinal end of the device (Warren para. 0023). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to modify the apertured regions of Jackson/Waksmundzki to have longitudinally offset apertures for the benefits taught in Warren.
As to claim 13, Jackson/Waksmundzki does not teach each aperture includes a maximum transverse dimension that is between 0.25 and 5.0 mm. In paragraph 0068, Warren incorporates by reference Mullane et al. USPN 4324246 who teaches an apertured topsheet 12 wherein each aperture includes an equivalent hydraulic diameter (EHD) less than or equal to about 0.64 mm where an EHD is defined by the following equation:
EHD = 4 X A/P where A is the area of the aperture 30 and P is the perimeter of the aperture 30. The EHD is the diameter of a circular aperture and represents a maximum transverse dimension of about 0.64 mm (Mullane col. 6, lines 42-60), which is included in the claimed range of between 0.25 and 5.0 mm. Mullane teaches apertures having a small EHD will attract and hold liquid due to the high capillary attraction of these apertures. IF the percentage of the apertures in the topsheet is not less than 25 percent, the topsheet will appear stained. Accordingly, less than 25% of the apertures have an EHD less than or equal to about 0.025 inches (0.064 cm - (0.64 mm)) (Mullane col. 6, lines 42-60). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to modify the apertures of Jackson/Waksmundzki/Warren with a diameter as taught in Mullane so that fluids can be captured and the topsheet does not appear stained.
Claims 14-16, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson et al. USPN 5643240 in view of Waksmundzki et al. US 20030208176 and further in view of Mullane et al. USPN 4324246.
As to claim 14, Jackson teaches an absorbent garment 10 comprising:
a chassis including:
a topsheet 12 having a film layer 22 defining a plurality of apertures 24 (col. 3. lines 33-41), and having an apertured region having percentage of open area greater than or equal to 5% (Jackson col. 2 lines 41-42); and
a non-apertured region surrounding the apertured region – which includes the longitudinal ends and the periphery of the topsheet (Fig. 1 and 2). Jackson teaches percent open area is calculated by specifying a unit area, calculating the surface area of all open areas within the specified unit area, dividing this total open area by the total surface area within the specified unit area, and then multiplying the quotient by 100 to yield percent open area (Jackson col. 3, line 64 through col. 4, line 2). As Jackson teaches percent open area includes calculating all open areas, a non-apertured region of Jackson would not have a percent open area and thus, the percent open area of the non-apertured region would be zero, which meets the claim limitation of a non-apertured region includes a percentage of open area less than two percent.
Jackson further teaches a backsheet 14; and
an absorbent core 16 disposed between the topsheet 12 and the backsheet 14.
Jackson teaches a separation layer 26 disposed underneath the topsheet 12 (Fig. 1 and 2; col. 3, lines 33-36). Jackson teaches the separation layer 26, performs the function of an acquisition/distribution layer (ADL) in that the separation layer 26 is in direct contact with the apertured film layer 22 and readily desorbs fluid from the surface of the sanitary napkin and transfers it to the absorbent core 26 (col. 4, lines 35-40).
Jackson does not teach the ADL boundary is offset from a boundary of the chassis. Waksmundzki teaches a disposable absorbent article having a fluid acquisition system (Waksmundzki Abstract). Waksmundzki teaches an acquisition-distribution layer system having a target zone of an absorbent article, such as a diaper, a panti-liner, etc. typically of a smaller area than the absorbent core of that article and is located in a generally centered position with respect to the sides of the core and may be centered or off-centered with respect to the ends of the core (Waksmundzki para. 0053). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to modify the acquisition-distribution layer of Jackson to be positioned offset from a boundary of the chassis depending on the target or insult zone as taught in Waksmundzki since both are from the same field of endeavor and solve the same problem of directing fluids towards the core.
Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches the present invention substantially as claimed. Jackson/Waksmundzki do not teach an area of the non-apertured region is greater than the area of the ADL. Mullane et al. USPN 4324246 teaches an apertured topsheet 12 including aperture areas 30 and nonapertured areas 31 (Mullane Figure 4; col, 4 lines 55-59). Mullane explains the larger the percent open area, the more readily the topsheet 12 will permit liquid to enter the absorbent core. Too large a percent open areas will, however reduce the strength of the topsheet 12 (Mullane col. 4, lines 61-65). Based on the combined teachings of Jackson/Waksmundzki and Mullane, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to provide Jackson/Waksmundzki with an area of the non-apertured region greater than the area of the ADL for the benefit of permitting liquid to enter into layers underlying the topsheet and still maintain the strength of the topsheet. “Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
As to claim 15, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches an area of the ADL is less than or equal to an area of the absorbent core (Waksmundzki Fig. 5, para. 0053).
As to claim 16, Jackson/Waksmundzki teaches the apertures 24 may be localized or they may extend across the entire surface of the film layer 22 as shown in Fig. 1 (Jackson col. 3, lines 42-44), in which case, the apertured region would at least be 25% or more of the area of the ADL 26, which would have values in the claimed range of between 25% and 95% of the area of the ADL 26.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson et al. USPN 5643240 in view of Waksmundzki et al. US 20030208176 and further in view of Mullane et al. USPN 4324246 and further in view of Warren et al. US Patent Application Publication 2005/0154362.
As to claims 18 and 19, Jackson/Waksmundzki/Mullane teach the present invention substantially as claimed. Jackson/Waksmundzki/Mullane does not teach at least a majority of the apertured region is disposed within the front portion of the chassis.
Warren teaches an absorbent article having a topsheet 14 with a portion 20 having a plurality of apertures 24 that can be disposed nearer one end of device 10 than the other end (Warren Fig. 2; para. 0019) for the benefit of capturing fluids that progress toward a longitudinal end of the device (Warren para. 0023). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to modify the apertured regions of Jackson/Waksmundzki to have longitudinally offset apertures for the benefits taught in Warren.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20 and 21 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Jackson teaches the topsheet 12 includes the apertured region 22 and a non-apertured region – which includes the longitudinal ends and the periphery of the topsheet (Fig. 1 and 2). Jackson further teaches an absorbent core 16 disposed between the topsheet 12 and the backsheet 14, at least a portion of the absorbent core 16 positioned in the crotch portion. Jackson teaches a separation layer 26 disposed underneath the topsheet 12 (Fig. 1 and 2; col. 3, lines 33-36). Jackson teaches the separation layer 26, performs the function of an acquisition/distribution layer (ADL) in that the separation layer 26 is in direct contact with the apertured film layer 22 and readily desorbs fluid from the surface of the sanitary napkin and transfers it to the absorbent core 26 (col. 4, lines 35-40). Jackson teaches the apertures may be localized or they may extend across the entire surface of the film layer 22 as shown in Fig. 1 (Jackson col. 3, lines 42-44). Jackson does not specifically teach an area of the apertured region is at least 90% of an area of the ADL.
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 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