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 .
This action is responsive to applicants’ amendment and response received January 26, 2026. Claims 1-2, and 4-14 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanders et al, US 2020/0240068 in view of Souter et al, US 2015/0252304.
Sanders et al teach a package for a unit dose detergent, containing a biodegradable outer shell and an inner structure with divided sections for holding multiple unit dose detergents (see abstract), wherein the package contains a removable lid and a bottom (claim 11) and the outer shell includes a child-resistant opening (¶39). The biodegradable outer shell may be paper/pulp based, but may also be recycled plastic (¶51) which is certainly leak resistant. Note that even the paper-based materials may be coated with a wax or other coating that does not allow water to permeate (¶51). Obviously, it would be a serious issue if a package of unit-dose detergents, designed to dissolve in water, would allow water to penetrate and so ruin the product inside. The reference recognizes this issue, obviously, and takes steps to address it and so the reference teaches the package claimed, however the composition of the unit dose detergent is not disclosed.
With respect to claim 14, the reference contemplates many different paper-based materials which will have cellulose lengths within the range claimed.
Unit dose detergents are extremely common in the art however, as demonstrated by Souter et al, which discloses a unit dose detergent comprising HEDP, bittering agent, hueing dye, and 10% water (¶129, example 2.1). Suitable dyes of the invention are phthalocyanine dyes (¶76). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use this unit dose detergent, or any well-known unit dose detergent in the package of Sanders et al as the package is designed for containing unit dose detergents and Sanders teaches a typical unit dose detergent.
Applicants have traversed this rejection on the grounds the reference does not include a leak resistant barrier material. In fact, just the opposite is true. The reference contemplates materials and coatings specifically designed to keep out water as discussed above.
Claims 1-2, and 4-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanders et al, US 2020/0240068 in view of Souter et al, US 2015/0252304 and further in view of McCully et al, US 2021/0214147.
Sanders et al and Souter et al are relied upon a set forth above. Neither reference teaches a package with an absorbent pad in case the product leaks. McCully et al teach a shipping container with an absorbent pad in case the product inside leaks (see abstract). It doesn’t matter what the product is that might leak. Persons of skill in the art and consumers alike understand that when there is a liquid spill, whatever the liquid, the first step is to absorb as much of the liquid as possible. Containers containing absorbent pads for leaks are known and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use such a container for transporting any product that might pose a leak risk.
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 CHARLES I BOYER whose telephone number is (571)272-1311. The examiner can normally be reached M-S 10-430.
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 5712722817. 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.
/CHARLES I BOYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761