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 .
Status of the Claims
Applicant argument and claims filed 05/21/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending and under consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/09/2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument, pages 1-2, that the office has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness at least with respect to claim 1, applicant argues that Dalal fails to teach wherein the first panel region comprises a side panel surface modification. Applicant asserts that a surface modifications are formed after the initial formation of the substrate itself, thereby forming a modified substrate according to page 17 lines 19-20 of the instant application. Applicant further relies on the statement that thermal bonding fibers to produce a nonwoven is not considered a surface modification. Applicant therefore contends that Dalal’s thermal bonding pattern 106 do not constitute the claimed surface modification.
This is not found persuasive. It is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a surface modifications are formed after the initial formation of the substrate) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Furthermore, even if the claims were interpreted as encompassing Applicant’s asserted limitation, i.e., the surface modification formed after the initial formation of the substrate and thermal bonding fibers to produce a nonwoven is not considered a surface modification, Dalal’s thermal bonding or ultrasonic bonding is not merely thermal bonding fibers producing a nonwoven. Rather, Dalal discloses ultrasonic bonding of initially formed two or more material layers to one another to form a laminate (Dalal; [0028]). This process is at least consistent with the speciation’s disclosure that “Surface modifications may comprise embossing 302, cuts 304 (e.g., apertures, perforations, slits), melted material or coatings 306, compressed material 308, plastic deformation 310 (e.g., activation stripes 312), folds 314, post-formation bonds 316 (e.g., adhesive bonds, pressure bonds, thermal bonds, and/or ultrasonic bonds applied after the substrate is formed) and combinations thereof”. Accordingly, Dalal’s bonding is consistent with the claimed surface modification under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Furthermore, Examiner asserts that even if Dalal teaches the bond applied prior to or during the initial formation of the substrate, applicant has not identified structural difference between a bond formed before/during substrate and a bond formed after substrate formation. Accordingly, once a product appearing to be substantially the same or similar is found, the burden is shift to applicant to shown an unobvious difference (please see MPEP 2113)
In response to applicant’s argument, pages 2-3, that the “elastic region” and a “second panel region” of the stretch side panels of Fukuda appear to be arbitrary without any teaching or support from the disclosure of Fukuda. Applicant contends that, contrary to the interpretation presented in the office action and the accompanying annotated figure, Fukuda teaches that region 330 (fig 62) is the elastic region and that regions outside region 330 in the Y direction (340) are inelastic regions. Applicant further asserts that the region 330 ends where the chassis overlap of the side panels and that the office action improperly extends the elastic region beyond the boundaries of region 330. Applicant therefore concludes that the combination fails to teach or suggest “wherein the second panel region is in at least partial overlapping relationship with the elastic region”
This is not found persuasive. The “elastic region” of Fukuda identified in the office action (see non-final rejection, page 7) is based on the width of the panel 303 across which the entirety of elastic member 333 extends in the Y direction, as shown in the annotated figure and Fukuda’s figures 56-62. Fukuda does not teach the portion of the elastic member 333 outside of the region 330 are necessarily inelastic, as Applicant asserts. Moreover, even assuming that such portions are inelastic, it does not necessarily excludes the portions from the claimed “elastic region” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, because the claim does not expressly define the boundaries of the “elastic region”, nor does it require entire portion of the elastic region to be elastically stretchable, and therefore the region of panel in which the elastic member 333 extend reasonably constitute the claimed elastic region. Accordingly, in this interpretation, the second panel region identified in the office action is at least partially overlapping with the elastic region, as required by the claim.
There are no distinct arguments directed to dependent claims.
Accordingly, applicant’s argument do not overcome the rejection and the rejection is maintained.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6 and 8-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal et al (US 20180271716 A1) in view of Mueller et al (US 20180042786 A1) and Fukuda et al (EP 2647360 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Dalal substantially teaches applicant’s claimed invention, and specifically discloses a new device with every structural limitation of applicant’s claimed invention (except for the limitations shown in italics and grayed-out) including:
an absorbent article comprising:
a first waist region (figure 9, 14), a second waist region (figure 9, 18), and a crotch region (figure 9, 16) disposed between the first waist region and the second waist region;
a chassis (figure 9, 20) comprising a topsheet (figure 9, 24), a backsheet (figure 9, 26), and an absorbent core (figure 9 and [0089] core 28 positioned between the topsheet 24 and backsheet 26) positioned between the topsheet and the backsheet; and
a side panel (figure 9, ear 30) comprising:
an ultrasonically bonded, gathered laminate (figure 5, [0058] and [0065] ear 30 comprising elastomeric laminate comprising elastomeric layer joined to first and/or second nonwoven layers by ultrasonic bonds) comprising an elastomeric layer (figure 5, elastomeric layer 302) and a substrate (figures 1-5 and [0059], nonwoven layers 300 and 304 comprising nonwoven web 100),
a first panel region (figure 6, portion of ear spans width Y+Z+X),
a second panel region (figure 6, portion of ear excluding the first panel region),
an elastic region (figure 6, elastic region 306), and
a first inelastic region (figure 6, inelastic region 312);
wherein the side panel is joined to the chassis at a chassis attachment bond (figures 6a, 9 and [0097] ears joined at chassis attachment bond 35 positioned in second waist region 18) and positioned in one of the first or second waist regions;
wherein the first panel region comprises a side panel surface modification (figures 1-4 [0058]-[0059] and [0063], bond patterns 106. the nonwoven layers 300 and 304 formed of a web 100 comprising bond patterns 106 illustrated in figures 1-4 that forms the external surface 314) and wherein the second panel region is free of the side panel surface modification, creating a morphological difference between the first panel region and the second panel region; and
wherein the first panel region is in at least partial overlapping relationship with the first inelastic region (figure 6, the first panel region overlaps the inelastic region 312) and wherein the second panel region is in at least partial overlapping relationship with the elastic region.
Dalal does not teach wherein the second panel region is free of the side panel surface modification, creating a morphological difference between the first panel region and the second panel region.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an absorbent articles with ear portions, Mueller teaches wherein the second panel region (figures 2-4, first inelastic regions 308 is free of bonds 46) is free of the side panel surface modification, creating a morphological difference between the first panel region and the second panel region (figure 4 and [0082], only first panel region defined by elasticize region 306 and second inelastic region 310 comprising bonding patterns 46 which at least creating aesthetic difference between the first and second panel regions).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Dalal to incorporate the teachings of Mueller and provides the side panel as claimed for the purpose of provide district visual characteristic and/or surface feeling that distinguishes bonding region from another as taught by Mueller ([0082]). For instance, such feature provide the user with instantaneous sensory feedback, allowing them to distinguish which portion of the side panel is being grasped without requiring visual confirmation. The feature facilities precise alignment, attachment, and removal of the side panels from corresponding fastening system.
The combination does not teach wherein the second panel region is in at least partial overlapping relationship with the elastic region.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a disposable diaper, Fukuda teaches wherein the second panel region is in at least partial overlapping relationship with the elastic region (annotated figure 61, the second panel region overlaps with the elastic region).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Dalal, as modified by Mueller, to incorporate the teachings of Fukuda and provides the side panel as claimed for the purpose of improving side panel breathability, fit and prolonged stretchability as taught by Fukuda ([0299]-[0305])
PNG
media_image1.png
694
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the side panel surface modification is disposed only in the substrate (Dalal; figures 1-4 [0058]-[0059] and [0063] the bonding patterns 106 only present on nonwoven web 100).
Regarding claim 4, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the first panel region differs from the second panel region in at least one of the following properties: breathability, stiffness, strength, extensibility, caliper, z-directional resiliency, softness, and tear resistance (The combination teaches a first panel region comprising surface bond patterns, i.e., bond pattern 106 of Dalal, while the second panel region is substantially free of the patterns. This difference results in a differential softness profile between two regions. Specifically, the surface bond patterns impart distinctive tactile properties to the first regions that are physical and sensory-wise distinguishable from the second region, thereby creating softness difference.)
Regarding claim 5, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the side panel surface modification is formed by the application of at least one of the following to the substrate: ultrasonic energy, laser energy, mechanical activation, pressure, liquid coating, folding, cutting, adhesive, and heat (Dalal; abstract, the laminate further includes a plurality of ultrasonic bonds, and the ultrasonic bonds are formed by ultrasonic energy)
Regarding claim 6, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the elastomeric layer comprises a film (Dalal [0060] Nonlimiting examples of elastomeric materials include film).
Regarding claim 8, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches comprising a waist panel (Dalal; figure 9, waist feature 80) comprising:
a waist laminate (Dalal; figures 2-4, [0058], [0075] and [0097] the waist feature formed of an elastomeric laminate 310 comprising nonwoven webs joined to elastomeric film, and the nonwoven webs comprise bond patterns 106 illustrated in figures 1-4 forms the external surface 314) comprising an elastic film joined to a nonwoven and a waist laminate surface modification,
wherein the waist laminate surface modification corresponds to the side panel surface modification in one of the group consisting of: pattern, modification type, relative surface area of the respective panel and combinations thereof (Dalal; figures 2-4, bonding pattern 106).
Regarding claim 9, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the side panel comprises a second inelastic region (Dalal; figure 6, inelastic region 308 of the second panel region).
Regarding claim 10, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 9.
The combination further teaches wherein the elastic region is disposed between the first inelastic region and the second inelastic region (Dalal; figure 6, the elastic region 306 disposed between the inelastic regions 308 and 312)
Regarding claim 11, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 9.
The combination further teaches wherein the first inelastic region or the second inelastic region is disposed proximate to the chassis and between the chassis and the elastic region (Dalal; figures 6 and 6a, inelastic region 308 proximate to chassis and disposed between the chassis and elastic region 306).
Regarding claim 12, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 9.
The combination further teaches wherein the first inelastic region or the second inelastic region comprises the chassis attachment bond (Dalal; figure 6a, the first inelastic region 308 comprises the chassis attachment bond 35)
Regarding claim 13, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the side panel is disposed in the second waist region (Dalal; figure 9, the ear 30 disposed in the second waist region 18), and the second waist region comprises a rear waist region ([0101] the second waist region is rear waist region).
Regarding claim 14, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the side panel surface modification is present on at least two layers of the laminate (Dalal; figures 1-4 [0058]-[0059] and [0063] the bonding patterns 106 present on nonwoven web 300 and 304).
Regarding claim 15, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the side panel surface modification is not present in the elastomeric layer (Dalal; figures 1-4 [0058]-[0059] and [0063] the bonding patterns 106 only present on nonwoven web 300 and 304).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal et al (US 20180271716 A1) in view of Mueller et al (US 20180042786 A1) and Fukuda et al (EP 2647360 A1), and in further view of Muhs et al (US 20100230857 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination does not expressly teach wherein the side panel surface modification comprises at least one of the following: embossing, apertures, perforations, slits, melted material, coatings, compressed material, secondary bonds that are disposed apart from the chassis attachment bond, plastic deformation, and folds.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a process for making embossed web, Muhs teaches wherein the side panel surface modification comprises at least one of the following: embossing, apertures, perforations, slits, melted material, coatings, compressed material, secondary bonds that are disposed apart from the chassis attachment bond, plastic deformation, and folds (figure 3, embossed elements 22).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, to incorporate the teachings of Muhs and provides the side panel surface modification as claimed for the purpose of providing desirable feel, visual impression, and/or audible impression as taught by Muhs ([0003])
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal et al (US 20180271716 A1) in view of Mueller et al (US 20180042786 A1) and Fukuda et al (EP 2647360 A1), and in further view of Lodge et al (US 5993432 A).
Regarding claim 7, Dalal, as modified by Mueller and Fukuda, teaches the absorbent article of claim 1.
The combination does not teach wherein the substrate comprises a pre-activated nonwoven.
In the same field of endeavor, namely web materials having elastic-like and expansive zones, Lodge teaches wherein the substrate comprises a pre-activated nonwoven (col 3 lines 30-35 “the material making up the expansive zone has been pre-strained or permanently elongated”).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Dalal, as modified by Mueller, to incorporate the teachings of Lodge and provide the substrate as claimed, for the purpose of providing elastic like behavior (col 1 line 65 col 2 line 10), which improves fit during use.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal et al (US 20180271716 A1) in view of Mueller et al (US 20180042786 A1)
Regarding claim 16, Dalal substantially teaches applicant’s claimed invention, and specifically discloses a device with every structural limitation of applicant’s claimed invention (except for the limitations shown in italics and grayed-out) including:
an absorbent article comprising:
a first waist region(figure 9, 14), a second waist region (figure 9, 18), and a crotch region (figure 9, 16) disposed between the first waist region and the second waist region;
a chassis (figure 9, chassis 20) comprising a topsheet (figure 9, 24), a backsheet (figure 9, 26), and an absorbent core (figure 9 and [0089] core 28 positioned between the topsheet 24 and backsheet 26) positioned between the topsheet and the backsheet; and
a side panel (figure 9, ear 30) comprising:
an ultrasonically bonded, gathered laminate comprising an elastomeric layer and a substrate (figure 5, [0058] and [0065] ear 30 comprising elastomeric laminate comprising elastomeric layer joined to first and/or second nonwoven layers by ultrasonic bonds),
a first panel region (figure 6, first inelastic region 308 except first lateral edge 40),
a second panel region (figure 6, second inelastic region 312 except second latera edge 42),
an elastic region (figure 6, 306), and
a first inelastic region (figure 6, lateral edge 42);
wherein the side panel is joined to the chassis at a chassis attachment bond (figure 9 and [0097] ears joined at chassis attachment bond 35 at first waist region 18) and positioned in one of the first or second waist regions; and
wherein the first panel region comprises a side panel surface modification ([0075] the first and/or second nonwoven web comprises bonding pattern shown in figures 2-4) and wherein the second panel region is free of the side panel surface modification, creating a morphological difference between the first panel region and the second panel region; and
a waist panel (figure 9, waist feature 80) comprising: a waist laminate comprising a waist laminate elastic film joined to a waist laminate nonwoven and a waist laminate surface modification (figures 2-4, [0058], [0075] [0097] the waist feature comprises elastomeric laminate 310 that comprises nonwoven webs joined to elastomeric film, the nonwoven web comprising bonding pattern illustrated in figures 2-4).
Dalal does not teach wherein the second panel region is free of the side panel surface modification, creating a morphological difference between the first panel region and the second panel region.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an absorbent articles with ear portions, Mueller teaches wherein the second panel region (figures 2-4, first inelastic regions 308 is free of bonds 46) is free of the side panel surface modification, creating a morphological difference between the first panel region and the second panel region (figure 4 and [0082], only first panel region defined by elasticize region 306 and second inelastic region 310 comprising bonding patterns 46 which at least creating aesthetic difference between the first and second panel regions).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Dalal to incorporate the teachings of Mueller and provide the surface modification as claimed for the purpose of providing distinct visual characteristic as taught by Mueller ([0082]). Furthermore, such feature provide the user with instantaneous sensory feedback, allowing them to distinguish which portion of the side panel is being grasped without requiring visual confirmation. The feature facilities, the precise alignment, attachment, and removal of the side panels from corresponding fastening system.
Regarding claim 17, Dalal, as modified by Mueller, teaches the absorbent article of claim 16.
The combination further teaches wherein the waist laminate surface modification corresponds to the side panel surface modification in one of the group consisting of: pattern, modification type, relative surface area of the respective panel and combinations thereof (Dalal; figures 2-4, bonding pattern 106)
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal et al (US 20180271716 A1) in view of Mueller et al (US 20180042786 A1) in further view of Laux et al (US 5904675 A)
Regarding claim 18, Dalal, as modified by Mueller, teaches the absorbent article of claim 16.
The combination further teaches wherein the waist panel comprises:
an inboard lateral edge (Dalal; figure 9, upper edge of waist feature 80 coextensive with second waist edge 19), an outboard lateral edge (Dalal; figure 9, opposite lower edge), and two longitudinal edges (Dalal; figure 9, latera edges);
wherein regions of the waist panel adjacent the outboard lateral edge and the longitudinal edges are bonded to the chassis, and at least a portion of an inboard lateral edge of the waist panel is unattached to the chassis.
The combination does not teach wherein regions of the waist panel adjacent the outboard lateral edge and the longitudinal edges are bonded to the chassis, and at least a portion of an inboard lateral edge of the waist panel3 is unattached to the chassis.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an absorbent article with improved elastic margins and containment system, Laux teaches wherein regions of the waist panel adjacent the outboard lateral edge and the longitudinal edges are bonded to the chassis, and at least a portion of an inboard lateral edge of the waist panel is unattached to the chassis (figures 1-3 and col 13 lines 45-65, waist pocket member comprising flange 82 and opposing end sections 128 are being attached to topsheet by generally U-shaped arrangement of attachment 126).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Dalal, as modified by Mueller, to incorporate the teachings of Laux and provide the waist panel as claimed for the purpose of creating effective pocket or waist flap structure to capture bodily fluids and waste as taught by Laux (col 13 lines 15-25).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal et al (US 20180271716 A1) in view of Mueller et al (US 20180042786 A1) in further view of Lodge et al (US 5993432 A).
Regarding claim 19, Dalal, as modified by Mueller, teaches the absorbent article of claim 16.
The combination does not teach wherein the waist laminate nonwoven comprises a pre-activated nonwoven.
In the same field of endeavor, namely web materials having elastic-like and expansive zones, Lodge teaches wherein the waist laminate nonwoven comprises a pre-activated nonwoven (col 3 lines 30-35 “the material making up the expansive zone has been pre-strained or permanently elongated”).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Dalal, as modified by Mueller, to incorporate the teachings of Lodge and provide the waist laminate nonwoven as claimed, for the purpose of providing elastic like behavior (col 1 line 65 - col 2 line 10), which improves fit during use.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal et al (US 20180271716 A1) in view of Mueller et al (US 20180042786 A1) in further view of Muhs et al (US 20100230857 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Dalal, as modified by Mueller, teaches the absorbent article of claim 16.
The combination does not teach wherein the side panel surface modification comprises at least one of the following: embossing, apertures, perforations, slits, melted material, and coatings.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a process for making embossed web, Muhs teaches wherein the side panel surface modification comprises at least one of the following: embossing, apertures, perforations, slits, melted material, and coatings (figure 3, extended elements 22).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Dalal, as modified by Mueller, to incorporate the teachings of Muhs and provides the side panel surface modification as claimed for the purpose of providing desirable feel, visual impression, and/or audible impression as taught by Muhs ([0003])
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SETH HAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2545. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0900-1700.
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.
/SETH HAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights