DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 1/16/2026 is acknowledged. Applicants election of biodegradable membrane, soy wax and palm wax and abietic acid are acknowledged. The species election has been withdrawn.
Claims are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/16/2026.
INFORMATION DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
2. Information Disclosure Statements filed 7/31/2024, 1/28/2025 and 1/21/2026 are acknowledged.
Claim Rejections- 35 USC § 112
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10-11 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites substantially homogenous mixture. Substantially is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "substantially" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Here, the metes and bounds of claim 10 is indefinite as it is unclear how much of the mixture to be considered “substantially” homogenous, and the instant specification does not set forth amounts which meet having a substantial amount.
Claim 11 recites substantially 30 % w/w and the term substantially is indefinite because substantially is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "substantially" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Here, the metes and bounds of claim 11 is indefinite as it is unclear how much is to be considered “substantially” 30 % w/w, and the instant specification does not set forth amounts which meet having a substantial amount.
Claim 24 recites pine rosin or the list of abietic acid and it is not clear what is meant by the “list of abietic acid”. It is noted that pine rosin is a mixture of abietic acid and other compounds having backbones which are similar to abietic acid so it is not clear if this is inclusive of pine rosin or solely abietic acid. It is unclear what is meant by the “list of abietic acid”.
Claim 25 recites substantially 45% w/w and the term substantially is indefinite because substantially is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "substantially" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Here, the metes and bounds of claim 25 is indefinite as it is unclear how much is to be considered “substantially” 45% w/w, and the instant specification does not set forth amounts which meet having a substantial amount.
Claim Rejections- 35 USC § 102
4. 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 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.
Claims 1-3, 8-10 and 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zimmermann et al. (US Patent 5037410).
Zimmerman et al. (US Patent 5037410) (hereinafter Zimmerman et al.) disclose disposable articles containing a matrix of waxes (abstract). Examples 1 and 9 disclose sheets containing stabilizer (styrene resin) and waxes such as beeswax (see Examples 1, 9, claims 1-2). These products are biodegradable and the outer cover degrades less than 60 days (Example 9). The waxes can be mixtures of waxes and the ingredients are in a homogenous mixture (Examples 1 and 9). The wax included may be beeswax which is known to have a melting point of at least 70˚C.
5. Claims 1, 5, 7-8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Klofta et al. (US Patent 9956312).
Klofta et al. (US Patent 9956312) (hereinafter Klofta et al.) disclose
absorbent article with a first acidic stabilizer, second acidic stabilizer (anhydrous citric acid food grade compound), colorant and matrix (carrier) including a tackifier, a low molecular weight polyethylene glycol and high molecular weight polyethylene glycol and water dispersible polymer (formulations) (claim 1). The absorbent core is “substantially cellulose free” however, substantially cellulose free” is defined as used herein to describe an article component, such as an absorbent core, that contains less than 10% by weight cellulosic fibers, less than 5% cellulosic fibers, less than 1% cellulosic fibers, no cellulosic fibers, or no more than an immaterial amount of cellulosic fibers thus an embodiment inclusive of a small amounts of cellulose fibers. Waxes are included such as microcrystalline wax (Table 1).
Claim Rejections- 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 5, 7, 9, 11, 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmermann et al. (US Patent 5037410) in view of Gavel et al. (US 20120045604).
Zimmermann et al. has been discussed supra in the 102. With regards to the fibrous material and cellulose, Zimmermann et al. discloses a variety of fillers are included which include cellulose fibers (example 9). Zimmerman further discloses that the wax at 30 % (claim 2). Paraffin wax and beeswax are disclosed which have different relative harness to each other which have different hardness.
Zimmermann et al. does not disclose the stabilizer is selected from pine rosin, abietic acid, glycerol ester of wood resin, fumaric modified rosin pentaerythritol ester or mixtures thereof.
Zimmerman disclose modifiers that include starch. Gavel et al. (US 20120045604) (hereinafter Gavel et al.) disclose use of pressure sensitive adhesives in biodegradable films that include starch or pine rosins (para 0084). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to substitute the starch of Zimmerman for the pine rosin. One would have been motivated to do so as these are both art recognized pressure sensitive adhesives. Simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results as both are art recognized adhesives for use in biodegradable films.
CORRESPONDENCE
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Danah Al-awadi whose telephone number is (571) 270-7668. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 am - 6:00 pm; M-F (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert A. Wax can be reached on (571) 272-0623. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANAH AL-AWADI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1615