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
Applicant's arguments filed 9 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument that a second bond point within a 10 mm radius is functional, not a mere design choice, it is noted that the present specification does not disclose any criticality to the range “within a 10 mm radius.” The present specification discloses a 10 mm radius as the broadest, and therefore not even the most preferred, range. The present specification also lacks any evidence of criticality of the range. Therefore, the range of within a 10 mm radius is not critical and does not distinguish over the prior art.
In response to Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 11, Ashraf et al. (2019/0380887) is now relied upon to teach the fiber count and numerical density of the built-up and attenuated regions.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (2022/0133552) in view of Houben et al. (11,007,094).
With respect to claim 1, Liu discloses an absorbent article having a liquid permeable topsheet, a liquid impermeable backsheet, and an absorbent layer, as disclosed in paragraph [0082]. The topsheet comprises a fibrous nonwoven material 30, as disclosed in paragraphs [0035] and [0091], and has an upper topsheet surface 32 and a lower topsheet surface 34, as shown in figure 2. The lower topsheet surface exhibits a lower topsheet surface Sdc 24h and the upper topsheet surface exhibits an upper topsheet surface Sdc 22h that is greater than the lower topsheet surface Sdc 24h, as shown in figure 2.
Liu discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of the lower topsheet surface Sdc being less than 0.350 mm, a second bond location being within a 10 mm radius of a first bond point location, and the absorbent layer comprising a layer of open-cell foam having an upper foam surface in direct facing contact with the lower topsheet surface.
Liu discloses in paragraph [0042] that the lower topsheet surface height is no greater than about 0.2 mm, but remains silent as to the exact Sdc of the lower topsheet surface. The Sdc is described in the present specification as reflecting an average magnitude of the difference in z-direction height between the highest and lowest points of the topography of one side of the nonwoven material. Since Liu discloses that the z-direction height 24h between the highest and lowest points of the topography of the lower side 34 of the nonwoven material 30 is less than 0.2 mm, then the average magnitude of difference in the z-direction height is inherently 0.2 mm, and Liu anticipates the claim limitation of the lower topsheet surface Sdc being less than 0.35 mm. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the lower topsheet surface of Liu to have a lower topsheet surface Sdc less than 0.35 mm to achieve the predictable result of a lower topsheet surface having an overall height of less than 0.2 mm as desired by Liu.
The pattern and spacing of the bond locations is merely a matter of design choice, and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the pattern of adhesive bonds of Liu have a central bonding region having a second bond location being within a 10 mm radius of a first bond point location.
Liu discloses in paragraph [0089] that the absorbent core can be made of any conventional materials suitable for absorbent articles, but remains silent as to the materials. Houben discloses an absorbent core for absorbent articles comprising a layer of open-cell foam, as disclosed in column 2, lines 60-67, the absorbent layer 1 having an upper foam surface (upper surface of upper sublayer 2) that is in direct facing contact with the topsheet 8, as shown in figure 1. Houben teaches that the open-cell foam absorbent core achieves a simple and cost-effective way to distribute and retain liquids and limit the amount of menses visible to the user, as disclosed in column 3, lines 36-64. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the absorbent layer of Liu a layer of open-cell foam having an upper surface in direct contact with the topsheet, as taught by Houben, to achieves a simple and cost-effective way to distribute and retain liquids and limit the amount of menses visible to the user.
With respect to claims 2-3, Liu discloses in paragraph [0041] that the upper topsheet surface height 22h is no smaller than about 0.8 mm, which is at least 15% greater than the lower topsheet surface height 24h of about 0.2 mm. Liu therefore anticipates the limitations of the upper topsheet surface Sdc being greater than 0.360 mm and at least 15% greater than the lower topsheet surface Sdc. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the lower topsheet surface of Liu to have an upper topsheet surface Sdc greater than 0.36 mm and at least 15% greater than the lower topsheet surface Sdc to achieve the predictable result of a lower topsheet surface having an overall height of greater than 0.8 mm as desired by Liu.
With respect to claim 4, Liu as modified by Houben discloses an upper foam surface having an upper foam surface Sdc, but does not disclose the lower topsheet surface Sdc is less than 250% of the lower topsheet surface Sdc. The upper foam surface is an open-cell foam and therefore has a high variation in its surface topography. It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the upper topsheet surface Sdc of modified Liu to be less than 250% of the lower topsheet surface Sdc to achieve the predictable result of a foam layer having a high variation of surface topography to create open cells.
With respect to claim 5, Liu as modified by Houben discloses an upper foam surface having an upper foam surface Sdc, but does not disclose the lower topsheet surface Sdc is less than 5000% of the lower topsheet surface Sdc. The upper foam surface is an open-cell foam and therefore has a high variation in its surface topography. It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the upper topsheet surface Sdc of modified Liu to be less than 5000% of the lower topsheet surface Sdc to achieve the predictable result of a foam layer having a high variation of surface topography to create open cells.
With respect to claim 6, Liu discloses the topsheet comprises a fibrous spunbond nonwoven material 30, as shown in figure 2 and described in paragraph [0069], comprising an ordered, patterned arrangement of alternating built-up regions 2 and attenuated regions 4, as shown in figures 1 and 2.
With respect to claim 7, Liu discloses the topsheet comprises a carded staple fiber nonwoven web material comprising bicomponent fibers, as disclosed in paragraph [0035], the bicomponent fibers having a sheath/core configuration, as disclosed in paragraph [0047].
With respect to claim 8, Houben teaches the open-cell foam is most preferably a polyurethane foam, as disclosed in column 9, lines 1-2, and further teaches an upper sublayer 2 and a lower sublayer 3, as shown in figure 1, wherein the upper sublayer average cell size is greater than the lower sublayer average cell size to achieve the advantage of wicking fluid towards the second layer, as disclosed in column 9, lines 34-65. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the absorbent layer of Liu comprise a polyurethane foam having upper and lower sublayers wherein the upper sublayer average cell size is greater than the lower sublayer average cell size, as taught by Houben, to achieve the advantage of wicking fluid towards the second layer and away from the wearer.
With respect to claim 9, Liu discloses a central bonding region comprising a pattern of adhesive bonds, as disclosed in paragraph [0060], but remains silent as to the central bonding region having a size of at least 15 cm2. The pattern and spacing of the bond locations is merely a matter of design choice, and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the pattern of adhesive bonds of Liu have a central bonding region having a size of at least 15 cm2.
With respect to claim 10, Liu discloses the topsheet comprises hydrophilic fibers, as disclosed in paragraph [0064].
Claim(s) 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (2022/0133552) in view of Houben et al. (11,007,094) and Ashraf et al. (2019/0380887).
With respect to claim 11, Liu discloses an absorbent article having a liquid permeable topsheet, a liquid impermeable backsheet, and an absorbent layer, as disclosed in paragraph [0082]. The topsheet comprises a fibrous nonwoven material 30, as disclosed in paragraphs [0035] and [0091], and has an upper topsheet surface 32 and a lower topsheet surface 34, as shown in figure 2. The topsheet comprises an ordered, patterned arrangement of alternating built-up regions 2 and attenuated regions 4, as shown in figures 1 and 2.
Liu discloses all aspects of the claimed invention with the exception of the lower topsheet surface Sdr % being less than 0.80, the upper topsheet surface Sdr % being greater than the lower topsheet surface Sdr %, the absorbent layer comprising a layer of open-cell foam having an upper foam surface in direct facing contact with the lower topsheet surface, and the built-up regions comprising a fiber count and numerical density per unit of x-y planar surface area of greater than a fiber count and a numerical density per unit of x-y planar surface area of the attenuated regions.
The Sdr % is described in the present specification as reflecting the contour or simplicity of the surface topography. Liu shows in figure 2 that the lower topsheet surface 34 has a less contoured, simpler topography than the upper topsheet surface 32, and further discloses in paragraphs [0041-0042] that the upper topsheet surface height 22h is greater than the lower topsheet surface height 24h. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the lower topsheet surface of Liu to have a lower topsheet surface Sdr % less than 0.8 mm and the upper topsheet surface Sdr % to be greater than the lower topsheet surface Sdr % to achieve the predictable result of a lower topsheet surface that is less contoured and simpler than the upper topsheet surface such that the upper topsheet surface has an improved capillary gradient and well-perceived three-dimensional appearance (see Liu, paragraphs [0008-0010]).
Liu discloses in paragraph [0089] that the absorbent core can be made of any conventional materials suitable for absorbent articles, but remains silent as to the materials. Houben discloses an absorbent core for absorbent articles comprising a layer of open-cell foam, as disclosed in column 2, lines 60-67, the absorbent layer 1 having an upper foam surface (upper surface of upper sublayer 2) that is in direct facing contact with the topsheet 8, as shown in figure 1. Houben teaches that the open-cell foam absorbent core achieves a simple and cost-effective way to distribute and retain liquids and limit the amount of menses visible to the user, as disclosed in column 3, lines 36-64. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the absorbent layer of Liu a layer of open-cell foam having an upper surface in direct contact with the topsheet, as taught by Houben, to achieves a simple and cost-effective way to distribute and retain liquids and limit the amount of menses visible to the user.
Liu discloses alternating built-up regions 2 and attenuated regions 4, as shown in figures 1 and 2, but remains silent as to the fiber count and numerical density per x-y planar surface area of the built-up regions and attenuated regions. Ashraf is disclosed in the present specification as depicting a topsheet for an absorbent article comprising alternating built-up and attenuated regions, and having a fiber density per unit of x-y planar surface area, as disclosed in paragraph [0037]. Ashraf teaches that a greater fiber count and numerical density per x-y planar surface area in the built-up regions than in the attenuated regions produces visibly discernable regions to improve fluid collection and flow, as disclosed in paragraphs [0070-0071]. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the topsheet of Liu with the built-up regions comprising a fiber count and numerical density per unit of x-y planar surface area of greater than a fiber count and a numerical density per unit of x-y planar surface area of the attenuated regions, as taught by Ashraf, to produce visibly discernable regions and improve fluid collection and flow.
With respect to claim 12, Liu shows in figure 2 that the lower topsheet surface 34 has a less contoured, simpler topography than the upper topsheet surface 32, and further discloses in paragraphs [0041-0042] that the upper topsheet surface height 22h is greater than the lower topsheet surface height 24h. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the upper topsheet surface Sdr % to be at least 30% greater than the lower topsheet surface Sdr % to achieve the predictable result of a lower topsheet surface that is less contoured and simpler than the upper topsheet surface such that the upper topsheet surface has an improved capillary gradient and well-perceived three-dimensional appearance (see Liu, paragraphs [0008-0010]).
With respect to claim 13, Liu shows in figure 2 that the upper topsheet surface 32 has a height 22h and discloses in paragraph [0041] that the height is greater than 0.8 mm. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the upper topsheet surface of Liu exhibit an upper topsheet surface Sdr % that is greater than 1.0 to achieve the predictable result of an upper topsheet surface with a high degree of topographical difference such that the upper topsheet surface has an improved capillary gradient and well-perceived three-dimensional appearance (see Liu, paragraphs [0008-0010]).
With respect to claim 14, Liu as modified by Houben discloses an upper foam surface having an upper foam surface Sdc, but does not disclose the lower topsheet surface Sdc is less than 250% of the lower topsheet surface Sdc. The upper foam surface is an open-cell foam and therefore has a high variation in its surface topography. It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the upper topsheet surface Sdc of modified Liu to be less than 250% of the lower topsheet surface Sdc to achieve the predictable result of a foam layer having a high variation of surface topography to create open cells.
With respect to claim 15, Liu as modified by Houben discloses an upper foam surface having an upper foam surface Sdr %, but does not disclose the lower topsheet surface Sdr %is less than 5000% of the lower topsheet surface Sdr %. The upper foam surface is an open-cell foam and therefore has a high variation in its surface topography. It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the upper topsheet surface Sdr %of modified Liu to be less than 5000% of the lower topsheet surface Sdr %to achieve the predictable result of a foam layer having a high variation of surface topography to create open cells.
With respect to claim 16, Liu discloses the topsheet comprises a fibrous spunbond nonwoven material 30, as shown in figure 2 and described in paragraph [0069].
With respect to claim 17, Liu discloses the topsheet comprises a carded staple fiber nonwoven web material comprising bicomponent fibers, as disclosed in paragraph [0035], the bicomponent fibers having a sheath/core configuration, as disclosed in paragraph [0047].
With respect to claim 18, Houben teaches the open-cell foam is most preferably a polyurethane foam, as disclosed in column 9, lines 1-2, and further teaches an upper sublayer 2 and a lower sublayer 3, as shown in figure 1, wherein the upper sublayer average cell size is greater than the lower sublayer average cell size to achieve the advantage of wicking fluid towards the second layer, as disclosed in column 9, lines 34-65. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the absorbent layer of Liu comprise a polyurethane foam having upper and lower sublayers wherein the upper sublayer average cell size is greater than the lower sublayer average cell size, as taught by Houben, to achieve the advantage of wicking fluid towards the second layer and away from the wearer.
With respect to claim 19, Liu discloses a central bonding region comprising a pattern of adhesive bonds, as disclosed in paragraph [0060], but remains silent as to the central bonding region having a size of at least 15 cm2 and a second bond location being within less than or equal to 10 mm from a first bond point location. The pattern and spacing of the bond locations is merely a matter of design choice, and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the pattern of adhesive bonds of Liu have a central bonding region having a size of at least 15 cm2 and a second bond location being within less than or equal to 10 mm from a first bond point location.
With respect to claim 20, Liu discloses the topsheet comprises hydrophilic fibers, as disclosed in paragraph [0064].
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 LYNNE ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6.
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.
/CATHARINE L ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights