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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on June 24, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-8 are pending. Claim 8 is withdrawn.
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.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omori et al (US Patent Application 2016/0375171).
Regarding claims 1-7, Omori et al teaches a water absorbing agent comprising polyacrylic acid salt comprising a FSR of at least 0.28 g/g/s and up to at least 1.0 g/g/s and bulk density of 0.55-7 g/cm3 (Abstract, Paragraph 441). Omori et al further teaches a CRC of not less than 28 g/g and not more than 60 g/g (Paragraph 431). Omori et al further teaches reverse phase suspension polymerization for polymerizing the aqueous monomer solution by suspending the aqueous monomer solution in a hydrophobic organic solvent (Paragraph 247). Omori et al further teaches the water absorbent resin can be in the form of spheres or an agglomerate of the spheres (Paragraph 285). Omori et al further teaches gel grinding with an extruder having a porous plate (Paragraph 271). However, Omori et al fails to specifically disclose the free swell rate (A) and free swell rate ratio.
With regard to the free swell rate (A) and free swell rate ratio, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a free swell rate (A) and ratio in Omori et al as Omori et al teaches having a high free swell rate as an objective of the instant invention (Paragraph 161) whereas Omori et al teaches a free swell rate (B) up to at least 1 g/g/s, which overlaps the instantly claimed range; it would only be obvious to the ordinary artisan to increase/adjust the free swell rate (A) and ratio as instantly claimed as a water absorbing resin which high water absorbing ability and speed is less likely to cause gel blocking and suitable for sanitary products. Furthermore, Omori et al teaches a similar method as the instant invention, hence, a similar free swell rate (A) and ratio is expected in Omori et al.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeuchi et al (US Patent Application 2009/0182294).
Regarding claims 1-7, Ikeuchi et al teaches a water absorbing agent particles comprising polyacrylic acid salt comprising a FSR preferably not less than 0.5 g/g/s and not more than 10 g/g/s and bulk density of 0.72-1 g/cm3 (Abstract, Paragraphs 34, 36, 175). Ikeuchi et al further teaches a CRC of 15-60 g/g (Paragraph 172). Ikeuchi et al further teaches reverse phase suspension polymerization for polymerizing the aqueous monomer solution by suspending the aqueous monomer solution in a hydrophobic organic solvent (Paragraphs 26, 117). Ikeuchi et al further teaches the water absorbent resin can preferably be in the form of spheres and the particles may be agglomerated (Paragraphs 131-132). Ikeuchi et al further teaches gel grinding with an extruder having a porous plate (Paragraph 123). However, Ikeuchi et al fails to specifically disclose the free swell rate (A) and free swell rate ratio.
With regard to the free swell rate (A) and free swell rate ratio, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a free swell rate (A) and ratio in Ikeuchi et al as Ikeuchi et al teaches having a high free swell rate as an objective of the instant invention (Paragraph 161) whereas Ikeuchi et al teaches a free swell rate (B) up to 10 g/g/s, which overlaps the instantly claimed range; it would only be obvious to the ordinary artisan to increase/adjust the free swell rate (A) and ratio as instantly claimed as a water absorbing resin which high water absorbing ability and speed is less likely to cause gel blocking and suitable for sanitary products. Furthermore, Ikeuchi et al teaches a similar method as the instant invention, hence, a similar free swell rate (A) and ratio is expected in Ikeuchi et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANISHA DIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-7730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday and Friday, 9:00AM-5:30PM.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/TANISHA DIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 July 14, 2026
Prosecution Insights