DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 9 and 10 are each dependent upon themselves, and therefore do not reference a claim previously set forth that they further limit the subject matter of. For the purpose of examination, claim 9 was interpreted as being dependent upon claim 8, and claim 10 was interpreted as being dependent upon claim 9. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-11 and 14-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6, 8-12, and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,135,105 (hereinafter referred to as the 105 patent) in view of Nakaoka (US 2007/0093164 A1).
Regarding application claim 1, 105 patent claim 1 recites all of the elements of application claim 1, except for the one or more adhesive materials comprising a hotmelt adhesive. As discussed in more detail below, Nakaoka teaches an absorbent structure (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2; ¶0031-0036) and corresponding method of making it (¶0061-0068) similar to the method of making an absorbent structure of application claim 1. Nakaoka further teaches that suitable adhesives for immobilizing the absorbent layer include hotmelt adhesives (¶0036 and 0061), and that absorbent structures constructed with such adhesives may be very thin, comfortable, shape-retaining, and have rapid fluid absorption properties (¶0008-0009 and 0012-0013). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude that the invention of application claim 1 is an obvious variation of 105 patent claim 1 in view of the teachings of Nakaoka.
Regarding application claims 2-11 and 14-15, 105 patent claim 1 in view of Nakaoka suggests the invention of application claim 1, which application claims 2-11 and 14-15 are dependent on, either directly or indirectly. The subject matter of application claim 2 is further recited by 105 patent claim 4, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claim 3 is further recited by 105 patent claim 2, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claims 4 and 5 is further recited by 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claim 6 is further recited by 105 patent claim 3, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claim 7 is further recited by 105 patent claim 5, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claim 8 is further recited by 105 patent claim 6, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claim 9, which is dependent on application claim 8, is further recited by 105 patent claim 8, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claim 10, which is dependent on application claim 9, is further recited by 105 patent claim 9, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 8. The subject matter of application claim 11 is further recited by 105 patent claim 10, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claim 14 is further recited by 105 patent claim 11, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. The subject matter of application claim 15 is further recited by 105 patent claim 12, which is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. Therefore, because the invention of application claim 1 is an obvious variation of 105 patent claim 1 in view of the teachings of Nakaoka, the inventions of application claims 2-11 and 14-15 are obvious variations of those of 105 patent claims 1-6 and 8-12 in view of the teachings of Nakaoka.
Claim 16 is rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as unpatentable over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 11,135,105 (hereinafter referred to as the 105 patent).
105 patent claim 4 is dependent on 105 patent claim 1. For double patenting to exist between the rejected claims and 105 patent claim 4, it must be determined that the rejected claims are not patentably distinct from 105 patent claim 4. In order to make this determination, it first must be determined whether there are any differences between the rejected claims and 105 patent claim 4 and, if so, whether those differences render the claims patentably distinct.
105 patent claim 1 recites all of the elements of application claim 16 except for the absorbent material comprising cellulosic material, as well as additional claim elements. 105 patent claim 4 recites that the absorbent material comprises a cellulosic material. Therefore, 105 patent claim 4 includes all the elements of application claim 16, as well as additional claim elements, rendering 105 patent claim 4 more specific than application claim 16. Thus, the invention of 105 patent claim 4 is in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of application claim 16. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the “species”. See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since application claim 16 is anticipated by 105 patent claim 4, it is not patentably distinct from 105 patent claim 4.
Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 11,911,250 (hereinafter referred to as the 250 patent) in view of Nakaoka (US 2007/0093164 A1).
Regarding application claim 1, 250 patent claim 1 recites all of the elements of application claim 1, except for the one or more adhesive materials comprising a hotmelt adhesive. As discussed in more detail below, Nakaoka teaches an absorbent structure (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2; ¶0031-0036) and corresponding method of making it (¶0061-0068) similar to the method of making an absorbent structure of application claim 1. Nakaoka further teaches that suitable adhesives for immobilizing the absorbent layer include hotmelt adhesives (¶0036 and 0061), and that absorbent structures constructed with such adhesives may be very thin, comfortable, shape-retaining, and have rapid fluid absorption properties (¶0008-0009 and 0012-0013). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude that the invention of application claim 1 is an obvious variation of 105 patent claim 1 in view of the teachings of Nakaoka.
Regarding application claims 2-15, 250 patent claim 1 in view of Nakaoka suggests the invention of application claim 1, which application claims 2-15 are dependent on, either directly or indirectly. The subject matter of application claims 2-15 is further respectively recited by 250 patent claims 2-15, which are dependent on 250 patent claim 1, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, the inventions of application claims 2-15 are obvious variations of 250 patent claims 2-15 in view of the teachings of Nakaoka.
Claim 16 is rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,911,250 (hereinafter referred to as the 250 patent).
250 patent claim 2 is dependent on 250 patent claim 1. For double patenting to exist between the rejected claim and 250 patent claim 2, it must be determined that the rejected claim are not patentably distinct from 250 patent claim 2. In order to make this determination, it first must be determined whether there are any differences between the rejected claim and 250 patent claim 2 and, if so, whether those differences render the claims patentably distinct.
250 patent claim 1 recites all of the elements of application claim 16 except for the absorbent material comprising cellulosic material, as well as additional claim elements. 250 patent claim 2 recites that the absorbent material comprises a cellulosic material. Therefore, 250 patent claim 2 includes all the elements of application claim 16, as well as additional claim elements, rendering 250 patent claim 2more specific than application claim 16. Thus, the invention of 250 patent claim 2 is in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of application claim 16. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the “species”. See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since application claim 16 is anticipated by 250 patent claim 2, it is not patentably distinct from 250 patent claim 2.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-14, and 16-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Nakaoka (US 2007/0093164 A1) in view of Björnberg et al. (US 4,892,535 A).
Regarding claim 1, Nakaoka discloses a method of making an absorbent structure (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2; ¶0031-0036; ¶0061-0066), the absorbent structure comprising: a supporting sheet (covering layer 21; ¶0034) and an absorbent layer supported thereon (23, 24; ¶0034), the absorbent layer comprising an absorbent material that comprises at least a superabsorbent polymer material (23; ¶0034 and 0060: the water absorbent resin disclosed by Nakaoka may be polyacrylic acid based, which page 19, line 13 – page 20, line 8 of the present specification lists as being superabsorbent); the absorbent structure and the absorbent layer having a longitudinal dimension and an average length, a transverse dimension and an average width, a height, and front, back and crotch regions arranged sequentially in the longitudinal dimension, the absorbent layer also having a longitudinal axis and perpendicular thereto a transverse axis (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2); the absorbent layer having a first longitudinally extending side portion on one side of the longitudinally extending side portion on the other side of the longitudinal axis (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2); wherein the absorbent layer comprises a first channel disposed at least partially in the first side portion (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2b; ¶0035), and a second channel disposed in the second side portion (2b), the channels being substantially free of the absorbent material, and extending through the height of the absorbent layer (Fig. 4, feat. 2b; ¶0035 – fiber absence region 2b lacks both pulp fiber and water-absorbent resin powder); wherein the absorbent structure comprises one or more adhesive materials to at least partially immobilize the absorbent layer, the one or more adhesive materials comprising a hotmelt adhesive (¶0061-0068), wherein the method comprises: depositing the absorbent material onto the supporting sheet (¶0061 and 0066-0067).
Nakaoka does not disclose placing the supporting sheet onto raised portion with a shape and dimensions corresponding to the first and second channels, such that the supporting sheet is provided with raised portions and remaining portions, that the absorbent material is deposited such that the absorbent material does not remain on the raised portions of the supporting sheet, but remains only on the remaining portions of the supporting sheet, or applying a pressure to the supporting sheet of the absorbent structure, the pressure being applied selectively to the portions of the supporting sheet that correspond to the channels.
Björnberg teaches a method of making (Figs. 4-5; Col. 5, lines 14-30) an absorbent laminate (Figs. 1-3, feat. 1; Col. 3, lines 54-65) comprising a supporting sheet (7; Col. 4, lines 10-24), a backsheet (3), bodies of absorbent material (4; Col. 3, line 66 – Col. 4, line 9), and channels between the bodies of absorbent material (9). The method comprises placing the supporting sheet material (Fig. 4, feat. 15; Fig. 5, feat. 7; Col. 5, lines 17-30) onto a drum, or roller, (17) with raised portions around holes (19) such that the raised portions correspond to, or coincide with, the channels and the holes correspond to the bodies of absorbent material (Fig. 5). Absorbent material is then deposited onto the support sheet such that it remains in the holes but not on the raised portions (Fig. 5; Col. 6, lines 43-63). The backsheet is then attached by pressing the backsheet and the supporting sheet between rollers (Fig. 4, feats. 17 and 59) such that the backsheet is attached to the raised portions which correspond to the channels, resulting in pressure being selectively applied to the supporting sheet and backsheet at those raised portions (Col. 7, lines 3-13). Björnberg teaches that such a method of manufacturing a channeled absorbent laminate is inexpensive (Col. 2, lines 26-30). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Nakaoka so that it includes placing the supporting sheet onto raised portion with a shape and dimensions corresponding to the first and second channels, such that the supporting sheet is provided with raised portions and remaining portions, that the absorbent material is deposited such that the absorbent material does not remain on the raised portions of the supporting sheet, but remains only on the remaining portions of the supporting sheet, and so that it includes applying a pressure to the supporting sheet of the absorbent structure, the pressure being applied selectively to the portions of the supporting sheet that correspond to the channels so that the absorbent structure can be manufactured inexpensively as taught by Björnberg.
Regarding claim 2, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method of claim 1, and Nakaoka further discloses that the absorbent material comprises cellulosic material (24; ¶0034 and 0059 – Nakaoka discloses pulp fibers, which is disclosed as a cellulosic material by the present specification in page 18, lines 16-20).
Regarding claim 3, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method of claim 1, and Björnberg further teaches that the absorbent laminate produced by the method comprises a margin of absorbent material (Figs. 1-3, feat. 11) surrounding all the channels (9). Therefore, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg further suggests that the absorbent structure has a pair of longitudinal side edges, a transverse front edge and a transverse back edge, and wherein the channels do not extend to any of the edges.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method of claim 1, and as discussed above, Björnberg teaches that the backsheet is then attached by pressing the backsheet and the supporting sheet between rollers (Fig. 4, feats. 17 and 59) such that the backsheet is attached to the raised portions which correspond to the channels, resulting in pressure being selectively applied to the supporting sheet and backsheet at those raised portions (Col. 7, lines 3-13). Therefore, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg further suggests that the pressure is applied with a pressure roll comprising raised portions that have substantially the size, shape and pattern of the channels, such that the raised portions coincide with the portions of the supporting sheet that correspond to the channels, with respect to claim 6, and that the pressure is applied selectively only to portions of the supporting sheet that correspond to the channels, such that compaction of the absorbent material is avoided, with respect to claim 6.
Regarding claim 8, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 1. Björnberg further teaches that adhesive may be applied to the absorbent layer after the absorbent material is deposited on the supporting sheet in order to provide for attachment of a further supporting sheet (Fig. 4, feat. 55; Col. 7, lines 3-15). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify the method suggested by Nakaoka in view of Björnberg so that the one or more adhesive materials of the absorbent structure comprises a first adhesive material applied to the absorbent layer or part thereof, once the layer is present on the supporting sheet in order to provide for attachment of a further supporting sheet as taught by Björnberg.
Regarding claim 9, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 8, and Nakaoka further discloses that the fibers and absorbent resin powder of the absorbent layer (Figs. 2 and 4, feat. 23 and 24) may be fixed on the supporting sheet (21) by a hot melt adhesive (¶0061). Therefore, Nakaoka further discloses that the one or more adhesive materials of the absorbent structure comprises a second adhesive material present between the supporting sheet and the absorbent layer.
Regarding claim 10, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 9. Nakaoka further teaches another absorbent layer (Fig. 2, feat. 3; ¶0033) which solely comprises superabsorbent polymer resin (33) that is adhered to supporting sheets (31, 32; ¶0037) via hot melt adhesives (S1 and S2; ¶0074) which are coated onto the supporting sheets (¶0072) before the resin is deposited onto the sheets (¶0071, 0072, and 0077). Nakaoka teaches that such application of adhesives prevents detachment of the superabsorbent polymer resin from the supporting sheets (¶0071) and provides seals which resist breakage even when wet (¶0077-0078). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify the method suggested by Nakaoka in view of Björnberg so that the second adhesive material that is applied to the supporting sheet or part thereof, prior to deposition of the absorbent layer or absorbent material thereof onto the supporting sheet in order to prevent the absorbent material from detaching from the supporting sheet and provide seals which resist breakage as taught by Nakaoka.
Regarding claim 11, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 1, and Nakaoka further discloses that the one or more adhesive materials of the absorbent structure are present in the channels (¶0061 and 0068 – the absorbent structure may be attached to the supporting material with hot melt adhesive, and hot melt adhesive is in the channels/gap portions 2b/25), and wherein the supporting sheet folds into the channels, or part thereof (Fig. 4, feat. 2b/25 – supporting sheet 21 is folded into channels/gap portions 2b/25), and wherein the supporting sheet is adhered to the absorbent material that forms the substantially longitudinal walls of the channels, or part of the walls of the channels (¶0061 and 0068).
Regarding claim 12, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 1, and Nakaoka further discloses that the absorbent structure comprises a further supporting sheet present adjacent layer (Figs. 1-4, feat. 22; ¶0034 and 0067).
Regarding claim 14, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 13, and Nakaoka further discloses that the channels (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2b) are formed by bonding of the supporting sheet and the further supporting sheet through the channels (¶0036), wherein the bonding through the channels is selected from glue, ultrasonics, or heat bonding (¶0036), and wherein the channels of the absorbent structure are at least partially maintained both in the dry state and in the wet state (Figs. 2-4, feats. 2b and 25; ¶0043 and 0067-0068).
Regarding claim 14, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg discloses the method according to claim 1, but are silent with respect to the percentage of integrity according to the Wet Channel Integrity Test. The percentage of integrity according to the Wet Channel Integrity Test indicates the proportion of the channel that remains intact after wet saturation (Present specification: Page 11, line 22 – Page 12, line 25), and therefore is an indication of the proportion of the channel that has not remained intact due to, for example, the pressure exerted by the swelling of absorbent material in the absorbent layer. Nakaoka teaches that the channels (Fig. 2, feats. 2b/25) should be formed with bonds that are strong enough to resist breakdown by the absorption of body fluids (¶0068 and 0078). Nakaoka teaches that maintaining the channels is important for ensuring that body fluid may continue to be diffused across the absorbent layer, even when wet (¶0043-0044). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify the method suggested by Nakaoka in view of Björnberg so that each of the channels of the absorbent structure has a percentage of integrity of at least 20%, measured following the Wet Channel Integrity Test so that the channels are strong enough to distribute fluid across the absorbent layer in all conditions as taught by Nakaoka.
Regarding claim 16, Nakaoka discloses a method of making an absorbent structure (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2; ¶0031-0036; ¶0061-0066), the absorbent structure comprising: a first supporting sheet (covering layer 21; ¶0034) and an absorbent layer supported thereon (23, 24; ¶0034), the absorbent layer comprising an absorbent material that comprises cellulosic material (24; ¶0034 and 0059 – Nakaoka discloses pulp fibers, which is disclosed as a cellulosic material by the present specification in page 18, lines 16-20); the absorbent structure and the absorbent layer having a longitudinal dimension and an average length, a transverse dimension and an average width, a height, and front, back and crotch regions arranged sequentially in the longitudinal dimension, the absorbent layer also having a longitudinal axis and perpendicular thereto a transverse axis (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2); the absorbent layer having a first longitudinally extending side portion on one side of the longitudinally extending side portion on the other side of the longitudinal axis (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2); wherein the absorbent layer comprises a first channel disposed at least partially in the first side portion (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2b; ¶0035), and a second channel disposed in the second side portion (2b), the channels being substantially free of the absorbent material, and extending through the height of the absorbent layer (Fig. 4, feat. 2b; ¶0035 – fiber absence region 2b lacks both pulp fiber and water-absorbent resin powder); wherein the absorbent structure comprises one or more adhesive materials to at least partially immobilize the absorbent layer (¶0061-0068), wherein the method comprises: depositing the absorbent material onto the supporting sheet (¶0061 and 0066-0067).
Nakaoka does not disclose placing the supporting sheet onto raised portion with a shape and dimensions corresponding to the first and second channels, such that the supporting sheet is provided with raised portions and remaining portions, that the absorbent material is deposited such that the absorbent material does not remain on the raised portions of the supporting sheet, but remains only on the remaining portions of the supporting sheet, or applying a pressure to the supporting sheet of the absorbent structure, the pressure being applied selectively to the portions of the supporting sheet that correspond to the channels.
Björnberg teaches a method of making (Figs. 4-5; Col. 5, lines 14-30) an absorbent laminate (Figs. 1-3, feat. 1; Col. 3, lines 54-65) comprising a supporting sheet (7; Col. 4, lines 10-24), a backsheet (3), bodies of absorbent material (4; Col. 3, line 66 – Col. 4, line 9), and channels between the bodies of absorbent material (9). The method comprises placing the supporting sheet material (Fig. 4, feat. 15; Fig. 5, feat. 7; Col. 5, lines 17-30) onto a drum, or roller, (17) with raised portions around holes (19) such that the raised portions correspond to, or coincide with, the channels and the holes correspond to the bodies of absorbent material (Fig. 5). Absorbent material is then deposited onto the support sheet such that it remains in the holes but not on the raised portions (Fig. 5; Col. 6, lines 43-63). The backsheet is then attached by pressing the backsheet and the supporting sheet between rollers (Fig. 4, feats. 17 and 59) such that the backsheet is attached to the raised portions which correspond to the channels, resulting in pressure being selectively applied to the supporting sheet and backsheet at those raised portions (Col. 7, lines 3-13). Björnberg teaches that such a method of manufacturing a channeled absorbent laminate is inexpensive (Col. 2, lines 26-30). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Nakaoka so that it includes placing the supporting sheet onto raised portion with a shape and dimensions corresponding to the first and second channels, such that the supporting sheet is provided with raised portions and remaining portions, that the absorbent material is deposited such that the absorbent material does not remain on the raised portions of the supporting sheet, but remains only on the remaining portions of the supporting sheet, and so that it includes applying a pressure to the supporting sheet of the absorbent structure, the pressure being applied selectively to the portions of the supporting sheet that correspond to the channels so that the absorbent structure can be manufactured inexpensively as taught by Björnberg.
Regarding claim 17, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 16. Nakaoka further teaches another absorbent layer (Fig. 2, feat. 3; ¶0033) comprising superabsorbent polymer resin (33) that is adhered to supporting sheets (31, 32; ¶0037) via hot melt adhesives (S1 and S2; ¶0074) which are coated onto the supporting sheets (¶0072) before the resin is deposited onto the sheets (¶0071, 0072, and 0077). Nakaoka teaches that such application of adhesives prevents detachment of the superabsorbent polymer resin from the supporting sheets (¶0071) and provides seals which resist breakage even when wet (¶0077-0078). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify the method suggested by Nakaoka in view of Björnberg so that it comprises the step of applying at least one of the one or more adhesive materials to the first supporting sheet prior to depositing the absorbent material onto the first supporting sheet in order to prevent the absorbent material from detaching from the supporting sheet and provide seals which resist breakage as taught by Nakaoka.
Regarding claim 18, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 16. Björnberg further teaches that adhesive may be applied to the absorbent layer after the absorbent material is deposited on the supporting sheet in order to provide for attachment of a further supporting sheet (Fig. 4, feat. 55; Col. 7, lines 3-15). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify the method suggested by Nakaoka in view of Björnberg so that it further comprises the step of applying at least one of the one or more adhesive materials to the first supporting sheet after depositing the absorbent material onto the first supporting sheet in order to provide for attachment of a further supporting sheet as taught by Björnberg.
Regarding claim 19, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 16, and Nakaoka further discloses that the absorbent structure comprises a further supporting sheet present adjacent layer (Figs. 1-4, feat. 22; ¶0034 and 0067).
Regarding claim 20, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 19, and Nakaoka further discloses that the channels (Figs. 1-4, feat. 2b) are formed by bonding of the supporting sheet and the further supporting sheet through the channels (¶0036), wherein the bonding through the channels is selected from glue, ultrasonics, or heat bonding (¶0036), and wherein the channels of the absorbent structure are at least partially maintained both in the dry state and in the wet state (Figs. 2-4, feats. 2b and 25; ¶0043 and 0067-0068).
Claim 7 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Nakaoka (US 2007/0093164 A1) in view of Björnberg et al. (US 4,892,535 A) and in further view of Guidotti et al. (US 2004/0243078 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the method according to claim 1, but does not disclose that the first and second substantially longitudinally extending channels are curved or angled and are mirror images of one another in the longitudinal axis.
Guidotti teaches an absorbent article (Figs. 1 and 2, feat. 100; ¶0030) comprising an absorbent structure (105) with curved channels (110 and 111) such that the distance between the center of the channels in the crotch portion is smaller than the distance between the ends of the channels (¶0030, lines 35-46). Guidotti teaches that this allows the absorbent article to adapt to the shape of the body when worn(¶0030, lines 35-46). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify the method suggested by Nakaoka in view of Björnberg so that the first and second substantially longitudinally extending channels are curved or angled and are mirror images of one another in the longitudinal axis so that the absorbent structure produced by the method will adapt to the shape of the body when worn as taught by Guidotti.
Claim 15 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Nakaoka (US 2007/0093164 A1) in view of Björnberg et al. (US 4,892,535 A) and in further view of Wciorka et al. (US 2009/0270825 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Nakaoka in view of Björnberg suggests the methods of claim 1, but does not disclose the dimensions of the channels as claimed.
Wciorka teaches an absorbent article comprising an absorbent core (Fig. 11, feat. 214; ¶0108) comprising a cavity (Fig. 11, feat. 214; ¶0108) comprising a longitudinal channel (Fig. 11, feat. 219; ¶0112). Wciorka teaches that the longitudinal channel may have a width from about 5% to about 60% of the absorbent core and a length from about 2% to about 50% of the length of the absorbent core (¶0009 and 0112). The claimed ranges for the length and the width of the longitudinal channels overlap with those taught by Wciorka. Wciorka teaches that a channel comprising these dimensions allows for the capture and distribution of bowel movements, which leads to cleaner skin and less irritation for the wearer (¶0005 and 0111-0112). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify the method suggested by Nakaoka in view of Björnberg so that each of the channels has an average width of from about 4% to about 25% of the average width of the absorbent layer, and so that each of the channels has an average length from about 5% to about 80% of the average length of the absorbent layer so that the channels may capture and distribute bowel movements as taught by Wciorka. Please see MPEP §2144.05(I).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 recites, among other things, that the application of pressure to the supporting sheet and a further material overlying the absorbent layer pressurizes the supporting sheet and the further material into the channels. This subject matter was indicated to be allowable in the Notice of Allowance dated 06/23/21 in family application 15/887,341, which issued as U.S. Patent No. 11,135,105. As indicated above, claim 4 has been rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent no. 11,135,105 in view of the teachings of Nakaoka, and over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 11,911,250 in view of the teachings of Nakaoka.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARJUNA P CHATRATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-8063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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 5712727159. 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.
/ARJUNA P CHATRATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/JESSICA ARBLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781