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 .
Note: The rejection is based on claims in the second preliminary amendment filed 11/08/2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1, 2, 7-14, 19-24, 27, and 28 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 1 recites the limitation "acquisition distribution layer" in lines 21 and 22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note: the term “acquisition distribution system” is used throughout claim 1. Claims 19, 20, and 27 also recite “the acquisition distribution layer”.
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.
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, 2, 7, 9-14, 19-24, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bianchi et al. EP 3238676 in view of McDowell USPN 5700254.
As to claim 1, Bianchi teaches an absorbent article 20 (Bianchi Fig. 9) comprising an absorbent core 28 sandwiched between a liquid permeable topsheet 24 and a liquid impermeable backsheet 25 (Bianchi para. 0082), and an acquisition distribution system 54 positioned between the topsheet 24 and the absorbent core 28 (Bianchi Figs. 9 and 10; para. 0081),
wherein the absorbent core 28 comprises absorbent material 60 selected from the group consisting of cellulose fibers, superabsorbent polymers and combinations thereof (Bianchi Fig. 2; para. 0008, 0046, 0048),
wherein the absorbent material 60 is contained within at least one core wrap substrate 16 enclosing the absorbent material 60 (para. 0040-0042), and
wherein a top layer 16 of the core wrap is adhered to a bottom layer 16’ of the core wrap to form one or more channels 26a, 26b substantially free of the absorbent material (Bianchi Fig. 2; para. 0043, 0057-0059),
wherein the channels 26 have a length extending along a longitudinal axis 80 and the absorbent core 28 has a length extending along the longitudinal axis 80 and
wherein the length of the channels 26 is from 10% to 95% of the length of the absorbent core (Bianchi para. 0060) and,
wherein the channels 26 each follow a substantially continuous path (Bianchi para. 0057-058; Figs. 1, 5, 7, and 9),
characterized in that the acquisition distribution system 54 comprises at least one spunbond layer and/or at least one carded nonwoven layer (Bianchi para. 0098-0099), and
wherein the acquisition distribution system 54 is positioned between the absorbent core 28 and the topsheet 24 such that at least a substantial portion of the spunbond and/or carded nonwoven layer is in direct contact with the absorbent core 28 and the topsheet 24 – where Bianchi teaches the core wrap 16 is part of the absorbent core 28 (Bianchi para. 0008, 0040), and the acquisition distribution system 54 is positioned at a body-facing side of the absorbent core 28 (Bianchi para. 0095), therefore, the acquisition distribution system 54 is in direct contact with the absorbent core, and
Bianchi teaches the acquisition distribution system 54 comprises synthetic fibers (Bianchi para. 0098)0098). However, Bianchi does not specifically teach the synthetic fibers are comprised at a level of greater than 80%wt by weight of the acquisition distribution layer. In paragraph 0095, Bianchi cites McDowall US 5,700,254 as prior art disclosing an acquisition distribution system. McDowall teaches acquisition layers fabricated from synthetic polymers (100%) (McDowall col. 10, lines 6-7; col. 11, lines 55-56). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide Bianchi with the synthetic polymers of McDowall since both are from the same field of endeavor and provide the same solution of providing an acquisition layer in an absorbent article.
Bianchi/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution layer 54 has a basis weight of from to 15 to 40 g/m² (Bianchi para. 0099).
As to claim 2, Bianchi/McDowall teaches the acquisition distribution system 54 is a nonwoven selected from the group consisting of: SM, SMS, SMMS, and combinations thereof (Bianchi para. 0098).
As to claim 7, Bianchi/McDowall does not specifically teach at least one of the channels 26 extends both along the longitudinal axis 80’ and along an axis perpendicular to the longitudinal axis 90’ (Bianchi Fig. 9) such that a shape is formed that is substantially U-shaped. However, Bianchi does teach channels 26 and 26' may be joined together, for example at their front or back extremities (Bianchi para. 0062), which would form a general U-shape as broadly as claimed.
As to claim 9, Bianchi/McDowall do not teach the mean flow pore size of the acquisition distribution system. However, McDowall teaches smaller interfiber pores and an interfiber pore gradient for faster capacity for z-directional liquid transfer to direct incoming fluids to underlying absorbent material (McDowall col. 9, lines 18-57). McDowall teaches the general concept of pore size affecting the liquid distribution function. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to determine through routine experimentation the mean flow pore size needed for a desired flow rate.
As to claim 10, Bianchi/McDowall do not teach the relative porosity of acquisition distribution system. However, Bianchi/McDowall teaches the acquisition distribution layer constructed from the claimed materials as discussed in claims 1 and 2 above. Therefore, since the prior art has met the structural requirements of the claim, Bianchi/McDowall obviously includes an acquisition distribution layer capable of achieving the claimed relative porosity.
As to claim 11, Bianchi/McDowell teaches the second end of at least one channel 26,26a is at a distance from the first end of at least one other channel 26,26b' taken along the longitudinal axis 80,80’ (Bianchi Figures 1 and 9), such that at least two spaced apart channels 26,26,26a,26b' are formed along the longitudinal axis 80,80’ that are offset from a transverse line 90,90’ running perpendicular from the longitudinal axis 80,80’ (Bianchi Figures 1 and 9). Bianchi teaches the channels are spaced apart (Bianchi Figures 1, 5, 7, and 9; paragraph 00062). Bianchi does not specifically teach the channels 26, 26' have a distance taken along the longitudinal axis 80 that is less than 18 mm. Bianchi teaches the smallest spacing distance may be at least 5mm, or at least 10mm, or at least 16 mm, for example (Bianchi paragraph 0062). Bianchi also teaches the channels may be parallel to the longitudinal axis; lateral axis, or curved (Bianchi paragraph 0061). At least in the instance of longitudinally oriented parallel channels, the spaced apart distance has values in the claimed range of less than 18 mm.
As to claim 12, Bianchi/McDowell teach the top layer 16 of the core wrap is adhered to a bottom layer 16' of the core wrap along the channels 26 (Bianchi Figures 10 and 11; para. 0057-0058), at a plurality of discrete joining areas 27 (Bianchi para. 0015), wherein the joining areas form a pattern consisting of elongated oblique members 26,26',26a,26b (Bianchi Figures 1, 7, and 9) having an angle a from the longitudinal axis 80 wherein the angle α is greater than 0° and less than 90° (Bianchi paragraph 0061).
As to claim 13, Bianchi/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution system 54 is adhered to the absorbent core 28 at one or more joining zones that are positioned outboard and/or inboard of the channels 26 such that the joining zones do not substantially overlap the channels 26 - where Bianchi teaches the acquisition distribution system 54 may comprise channel areas free of acquisition/distribution materials (para. 0017) and since the part of the acquisition distribution system 54 is superposed over the channel do not contain acquisition material, the remaining portions of the acquisition distribution system would not substantially overlap the channels 26, 26’.
As to claim 14, Bianchi/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution system 54 has a thickness of less than 0.5mm – where McDowall teaches the acquisition distribution system has a thickness of from about .001 inches to about 0.5 inches (.0254 mm -12.7 mm) (McDowall col. 3, lines 61-67).
As to claim 19, Bianchi/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution system 54 has a basis weight of from 18 to 35 g/m² - where Bianchi teaches the carded web has a basis weight from about 15 gsm to about 120 gsm (Bianchi para. 0099), which has values in the claimed range.
As to claim 20, Bianchi/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution system 54 has a basis weight of from 20 to 30 g/m² - where Bianchi teaches the carded web has a basis weight from about 15 gsm to about 120 gsm (Bianchi para. 0099), which has values in the claimed range.
As to claim 21, Bianchi/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution system 54 is multi-layered and comprises at least one meltblown layer (Bianchi para. 0098).
As to claim 22, Bianchi/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution system 54 comprises at least one spunbond layer (Bianchi para. 0098).
As to claim 23, Bianchi/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution system 54 comprises at least one carded nonwoven layer (Bianchi para. 098-0099).
As to claim 24, Bianchi/McDowall teach the core 28 comprises at least four channels (Bianchi para. 0059). Bianchi teaches shorter channel-forming areas substantially free of absorbent material may for example be present in the back region or the front region of the core as illustrated for example in the Figures of [Rosati et al.] WO 2012/170778 (Bianchi para. 0059). Rosati teaches at least four channels as shown in Fig. 3B; and wherein the distance between second and first ends of a first pair of longitudinally displaced channels is different from the distance between second and first ends of a second pair of longitudinally displaced channels wherein the first pair of channels run substantially parallel to the second pair of channels (Rosati Fig. 3B).
As to claim 28, Bianchi/McDowall teach An absorbent article according to Claim 1 wherein the acquisition distribution system 54 is the top layer of the core wrap – where Bianchi teaches the core wrap 16 is part of the absorbent core 28 (Bianchi para. 0008, 0040), and the acquisition distribution system 54 is positioned directly under the topsheet and an acquisition layer disposed between the distribution layer and the absorbent core (Bianchi para. 0095), therefore, the acquisition distribution system 54 is in direct contact with the absorbent core 28.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bianchi et al. EP 3238676 in view of McDowell USPN 5700254 and further in view of Schneider USPN 7786341.
Bianchi/McDowall teach the present invention substantially as claimed. Bianchi/McDowall do not teach the acquisition distribution system 54 has a specific volume of less than 11.4 cm³/g. Bianchi teaches in paragraph 0098, Schneider et al. USPN 7786341 discloses exemplary upper acquisition layers. Schneider teaches a liquid acquisition member having a void volume of 7-11 cm3/g having values in the claimed range of less than 11.4 cm3/g, for the benefit of providing enough void volume for efficient liquid acquisition and transport (Schneider col. 8, line 58 through col. 9, line 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to provide the acquisition distribution system of Bianchi/McDowall with the void volume taught in Schneider for the benefits Schneider teaches.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bianchi et al. EP 3238676 in view of McDowall USPN 5700254 and further in view of Fahrenkrug et al. USPN 5376198. Bianchi/McDowall teach the present invention substantially as claimed. Bianchi/McDowall do not teach the acquisition distribution system 54 has a wetness retention factor of less than 11 as measured according to the Wetness retention factor test method herein. than 11. Bianchi teaches an absorbent article having an acquisition distribution system that functions to quickly acquire fluids and distribute (transfer) it to the absorbent core (Bianchi para. 0095). Fahrenkrug teaches a transfer layer comprising synthetic fibers similar to the Bianchi acquisition/distribution system 54 (Fahrenkrug col. 8, line 9-27). Fahrenkrug further teaches the transfer layer preferably has low rewet properties and improved wet resiliency (col. 7, line 65-67). Fahrenkrug teaches a method of decreasing rewet properties is by distancing the liner (topsheet) from the absorbent, and a method of increasing wet resiliency is the use of synthetic fibers (col. 7, line 65 through col. 8, line 2). Although Fahrenkrug does not teach the claimed wetness retention faction, Fahrenkrug does teach the acquisition (transfer) layer does have low rewet, which correlates with a low wetness retention factor. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to provide the acquisition distribution system of Bianchi/McDowall with a wet retention factor in the claimed range since Bianchi/McDowall/Fahrenkrug comprise acquisition systems with primarily synthetic fibers and are used in the same environment to solve the same problem of low rewet.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bianchi et al. EP 3238676 in view of Fahrenkrug et al. USPN 5376198 and further in view of McDowall USPN 5700254.
As to claim 29, Bianchi teaches an absorbent article 20 (Bianchi Fig. 9) comprising an absorbent core 28 sandwiched between a liquid permeable topsheet 24 and a liquid impermeable backsheet 25 (Bianchi para. 0082), and an acquisition distribution system 54 positioned between the topsheet 24 and the absorbent core 28 (Bianchi Figs. 9 and 10; para. 0081),
wherein the absorbent core 28 comprises absorbent material 60 selected from the group consisting of cellulose fibers, superabsorbent polymers and combinations thereof (Bianchi Fig. 2; para. 0008, 0046, 0048),
wherein the absorbent material 60 is contained within at least one core wrap substrate 16 enclosing the absorbent material 60 (para. 0040-0042), and
wherein a top layer 16 of the core wrap is adhered to a bottom layer 16’ of the core wrap to form one or more channels 26a, 26b substantially free of the absorbent material (Bianchi Fig. 2; para. 0043, 0057-0059), wherein the channels 26 have a length extending along a longitudinal axis 80 and the absorbent core 28 has a length extending along the longitudinal axis 80 and wherein the length of the channels 26 is from 10% to 95% of the length of the absorbent core (Bianchi para. 0060) and,
wherein the channels 26 each follow a substantially continuous path (Bianchi para. 0057-058; Figs. 1, 5, 7, and 9),
characterized in that the acquisition distribution system 54 comprises at least one spunbond layer and/or at least one carded nonwoven layer (Bianchi para. 0098-0099), and
wherein the acquisition distribution system 54 is the top layer of the core wrap and is positioned between the absorbent core 28 and the topsheet 24 such that at least a substantial portion of the spunbond and/or carded nonwoven layer is in direct contact with the absorbent core 28 and the topsheet 24 – where Bianchi teaches the core wrap 16 is part of the absorbent core 28 (Bianchi para. 0008, 0040), and the acquisition distribution system 54 is positioned directly under the topsheet and an acquisition layer disposed between the distribution layer and the absorbent core (Bianchi para. 0095), therefore, the acquisition distribution system 54 is in direct contact with the absorbent core 28 and the topsheet.
Bianchi does not teach the acquisition distribution system 54 has a wetness retention factor of less than 11 as measured according to the Wetness retention factor test method herein. than 11. Bianchi teaches an absorbent article having an acquisition distribution system that functions to quickly acquire fluids and distribute (transfer) it to the absorbent core (Bianchi para. 0095). Fahrenkrug teaches a transfer layer comprising synthetic fibers similar to the Bianchi acquisition/distribution system 54 (Fahrenkrug col. 8, line 9-27). Fahrenkrug further teaches the transfer layer preferably has low rewet properties and improved wet resiliency (col. 7, line 65-67). Fahrenkrug teaches a method of decreasing rewet properties is by distancing the liner (topsheet) from the absorbent, and a method of increasing wet resiliency is the use of synthetic fibers (col. 7, line 65 through col. 8, line 2). Although Fahrenkrug does not teach the claimed wetness retention faction, Fahrenkrug does teach the acquisition (transfer) layer does have low rewet, which correlates with a low wetness retention factor. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was originally filed to provide the acquisition distribution system of Bianchi with a wet retention factor in the claimed range since Bianchi and Fahrenkrug both comprise acquisition systems with primarily synthetic fibers and are used in the same environment to solve the same problem of low rewet.
Bianchi/Fahrenkrug teach the acquisition distribution system 54 comprises synthetic fibers (Bianchi para. 0098). However, Bianchi/Fahrenkrug does not specifically teach the synthetic fibers are comprised at a level of greater than 80%wt by weight of the acquisition distribution layer. In paragraph 0095, Bianchi cites McDowall US 5,700,254 as prior art disclosing an acquisition distribution system. McDowall teaches acquisition layers fabricated from synthetic polymers (100%) (McDowall col. 10, lines 6-7; col. 11, lines 55-56). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide Bianchi with the synthetic polymers of McDowall since both are from the same field of endeavor and provide the same solution of providing an acquisition layer in an absorbent article.
Bianchi/Fahrenkrug/McDowall teach the acquisition distribution layer 54 has a basis weight of from to 15 to 40 g/m² (Bianchi para. 0099).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2, 7-14, 19-22, 24, and 27-29 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 7-12, 15, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,109,097 Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are a broader recitation of the claims of the patent in that it does not set forth a specific type specific first and second identifiers. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,109,097 contain each and every limitation of claim a of the instant application as well as additional features. The claims of the US Patent are narrower than the claims of the instant application, and effectively anticipate the instant claims. Thus the invention of the patent claim 1 is in effect a "species" of the "generic" invention of the instant claim 1. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the “species". See ln re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Additionally, the subject matter of the present application substantially overlaps the subject matter of the aforementioned patent claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACQUELINE F STEPHENS whose telephone number is (571)272-4937. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00.
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.
/JACQUELINE F STEPHENS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781