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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 July 09, 2026 has been entered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification, see for example figures 5 and 6, discloses three types of PLA, i.e., PLA A, PLA B and PLA C, but does not recite what they are, besides being PLAs, or what is/are their differences. There is no description of the type of PLAs and therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art cannot reproduce the experiments/samples. Note that they are different compounds/materials as evidenced by the different results obtained with their use.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1-8 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without the type of PLA and the amount of said PLA to obtain the claimed property, which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). Figure 6, shows that to obtain the claimed wet crimp strength two variables have to be present, i.e., the type of polylactic acid, PLA B, (which has not been described in the specification and therefore, cannot be compared with the prior art) and the amount of said PLA in the fiber material. As it can be seen in figure 6, not only the use of the type of PLA is necessary to obtain the claimed wet crimping strength, but the PLA has to be added at certain minimum amount to obtain the claimed wet crimping strength. None of those properties are part of the independent claim. Also there is no evidence that said property can be obtained using polyglycolic acid and copolymers thereof as recited in the independent claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-8 and 20-22 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 20-22 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ) and overcomes the objection to the specification, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not teach nor fairly suggest a crimped fiber material, at least in a portion of it, including cellulosic fibers and non-fibrous binder of the claimed type and having the claimed property, i.e., wet crimping strength.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in the art of “Filter Material for Food Packaging.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE A FORTUNA whose telephone number is (571)272-1188. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY- FRIDAY 11:30 PM- 9:00 PM.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. 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.
/JOSE A FORTUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
JAF
Prosecution Insights