DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 16-17 directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: the newly recited claims now require tack stitches in combination with a pattern of discrete deposits of adhesive.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 16-17 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beck et al. (US 2006/0070163).
With reference to claim 1, Beck et al. (hereinafter “Beck”) discloses a durable absorbent pant [0003], comprising:
an outer pant structure comprising:
a front waist portion with a front waist edge (see annotated figure 1 below);
a rear waist portion with a rear waist edge (opposite rear of garment);
a crotch portion having a forward portion meeting the front waist portion and a rearward portion meeting the rear waist portion (see annotated figure 1 below); and
left and right hip side portions at which the front waist portion meets the rear waist portion to form a waist opening with a waist opening edge comprising the front waist edge and the rear waist edge, and to form left and right leg openings with left and right leg opening edges (see annotated figure 1 below); and
a gusset assembly disposed at least partially in the crotch portion (figure 3), the gusset assembly having a wearer-facing surface, an outward-facing surface and a perimeter edge (figures 4-9), and comprising:
an absorbent layer (14B disclosed as including cotton in [0018]);
a liquid-impermeable barrier layer (14C) disposed beneath the absorbent layer (see figures 4-9),
the barrier layer comprising an outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly (see figures 4-9); and
an edge barrier that overlies portions of the wearer-facing surface proximate the perimeter edge within the crotch portion and effectively continues over and around the perimeter edge from the wearer-facing surface to the outward-facing surface in the crotch region, wherein the edge barrier comprises one or more section(s) of liquid impermeable edge sealing strip material (14D) joined to the barrier layer proximate the perimeter edge, or, wherein the edge barrier comprises an extension of the barrier layer as set forth in annotated figure 9 below.
PNG
media_image1.png
308
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
372
830
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The difference between Beck and claim 1 is the explicit recitation that the outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly is affixed within the crotch portion by a pattern of discrete deposits of adhesive.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly of Beck with a pattern of discrete deposits of adhesive affixed within the crotch portion because Beck discloses that the gusset has adhesive strips or other means of temporarily being attached to or held against another garment, or attached to or held against the body of a person or other animal, at the location desired in [0046].
One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the adhesive should be placed on an outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly in order to secure it to an underlying garment and that securement in the crotch portion, although Beck recognizes any desired location, is preferable to provide a secure attachment.
With reference to claims 2 and 4, Beck teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
The difference between Beck and claims 2 and 4 is the provision that the deposits of adhesive in the pattern have a specific average size and/or shape.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the size of the of the adhesive as desired since it has been held that the mere change in size and/or shape of elements previously disclosed in the prior art is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 3, Beck discloses a durable absorbent pant wherein an area of an outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly, entirely surrounded by but longitudinally and laterally inboard of the perimeter edge, is not affixed to the crotch portion as shown in annotated figure 9 above.
Regarding claim 7, Beck discloses a durable absorbent pant wherein the deposits of adhesive affix one or both the barrier layer and edge barrier directly to the crotch portion as set forth in [0045] and as shown in figure 9.
Claims 8-10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kajanthan et al. (US 2021/0177676).
Regarding claim 8, Kajanthan et al. (hereinafter “Kajanthan”) discloses a durable absorbent pant, comprising:
an outer pant structure comprising: a front waist portion with a front waist edge (figure 8A);
a rear waist portion with a rear waist edge (figure 8B);
a crotch portion having a forward portion meeting the front waist portion and a rearward portion meeting the rear waist portion (figures 6B and 6D); and
left and right hip side portions at which the front waist portion meets the rear waist portion to form a waist opening with a waist opening edge comprising the front waist edge and the rear waist edge, and to form left and right leg openings with left and right leg opening edges (figures 8A and 8B); and
a gusset assembly (100) disposed at least partially in the crotch portion (see figures), the gusset assembly having a wearer-facing surface, an outward-facing surface and a perimeter edge (see figures, especially figure 4C), and comprising:
an absorbent layer (104);
a liquid-impermeable barrier layer (106) disposed beneath the absorbent layer (figure 4C), the barrier layer comprising an outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly (figure 4C); and
an edge barrier (110) that overlies portions of the wearer-facing surface proximate the perimeter edge within the crotch portion and effectively continues over and around the perimeter edge from the wearer-facing surface to the outward-facing surface in the crotch region (figure 4C),
wherein the edge barrier comprises one or more section(s) of liquid impermeable edge sealing strip material joined to the barrier layer proximate the perimeter edge, or, wherein the edge barrier comprises an extension of the barrier layer [0049];
an extending flange (112) comprising a fabric material [0053] having a width, the entirety of the width being bonded (113) to the edge barrier, the flange extending laterally outboard beyond a proximate side edge of the absorbent layer in the crotch portion as shown in figure 4C.
The difference between Kajanthan and claim 8 is the explicit recitation that the flange is affixed to the outer pant structure by a pattern of discrete deposits of adhesive.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the affix the flange of Kajanthan to the outer pant structure by a pattern of discrete deposits of adhesive because Kajanthan discloses that the flange is affixed to the outer pant structure via bonding means [0055] and that the bonding means may be an adhesive as set forth in [0043].
While a pattern of discrete deposits is not explicitly described, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the disclosed adhesive as desired since it has been held that the mere change in size and/or shape of an element previously set forth in the prior art is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 9, Kajanthan discloses a durable absorbent pant wherein the gusset assembly comprises an elastic stretch knit fabric as set forth in [0065] and in [0031].
With respect to claim 10, Kajanthan discloses a durable absorbent pant wherein the barrier layer comprises an elastomeric film as set forth in [0041].
With reference to claim 20, Kajanthan teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 8.
The difference between Kajanthan and claim 20 is the provision that the edge barrier and the extending flange are formed from a combination “V”-shaped strip having legs respectively adhered to the wearer-facing surface and the outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly.
Kajanthan discloses the edge barrier and the extending flange are formed from a combination substantially “V”-shaped strip having legs respectively adhered to the wearer-facing surface and the outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly as shown in figures 10a-10b.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the disclosed shape as desired since it has been held that mere changes in size and/or shape of an element previously set forth in the prior art is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beck et al. (US 2006/0070163) and further in view of Kajanthan et al. (US 2021/0177676).
With reference to claim 5, Beck teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
The difference between Beck and claim 5 is the provision that the pattern of deposits of adhesive follow paths that generally parallel the paths of the leg opening edges and are disposed inboard thereof and proximate thereto.
Kajanthan teaches an analogous absorbent garment including a gusset having left and right lateral adhesive that follows paths that generally parallel the paths of the leg opening edges and are disposed inboard thereof and proximate thereto as set forth in [0071] and as shown in figures 4D and 6B.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the article of Beck with adhesive that follows paths of the leg opening edges as taught by Kajanthan in order to minimize the risk of leakage through the pad as taught by Kajanthan in [0060].
As to claim 6, see the rejection of claim 5 and the figures which show the connection of the adhesive along programmed contours conforming to the paths of the leg openings as claimed.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kajanthan et al. (US 2021/0177676) and further in view of Sepello et al. (US 2021/0290447).
With reference to claim 11, Kajanthan teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 8.
The difference between Kajanthan and claim 11 is the provision that the film is elastomeric.
Sepello et al. (hereinafter “Sepello”) teaches an analogous absorbent article wherein the edge barrier comprises an elastomeric film as set forth in [0079-0080].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the barrier of Kajanthan with an elastomeric material as taught by Sepello in an effort to not substantially reduce the elastic elongation capabilities of the assembled layers as taught by Sepello in [0079].
With reference to claim 12, Kajanthan teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 8.
The difference between Kajanthan and claim 12 is the provision that the article includes a supplemental elastic stretch knit fabric trip strip having a first strip portion affixed to the gusset assembly at a first attachment location and a second strip portion affixed to the front or rear waist portion at a second attachment location, wherein the deposits of adhesive are present at either or both the first attachment location and second attachment location.
Sepello teaches an analogous absorbent article including a supplemental elastic stretch knit fabric trip strip having a first strip portion (170a) affixed to the gusset assembly at a first attachment location and a second strip portion (170c) affixed to the front or rear waist portion at a second attachment location as shown in figure 2B. Sepello also discloses that the depos deposits of adhesive are present at either or both the first attachment location and second attachment locations as set forth in [0078-0079].
Claims 13-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sepello et al. (US 2021/0290447).
With reference to claim 13, Sepello discloses a durable absorbent pant (abstract), comprising:
an outer pant structure (figure 1) comprising:
a front waist portion with a front waist edge (figures 2A-2B);
a rear waist portion with a rear waist edge (figures 2A-2B);
a crotch portion having a forward portion meeting the front waist portion and a rearward portion meeting the rear waist portion (figures 2A-2B); and
left and right hip side portions at which the front waist portion meets the rear waist portion to form a waist opening with a waist opening edge comprising the front waist edge and the rear waist edge, and to form left and right leg openings with left and right leg opening edges (figure 1); and
a gusset assembly disposed at least partially in the crotch portion [0034], the gusset assembly having a wearer-facing surface, an outward-facing surface and a perimeter edge (figures 3A-3D), and comprising:
an absorbent layer (131b);
a liquid-impermeable barrier layer disposed beneath the absorbent layer (131c), the barrier layer comprising an outward-facing surface of the gusset assembly as set forth in figure 4.
Sepello also discloses that the gusset assembly is affixed to the outer pant structure in the front and rear waist portions, respectively, and is unaffixed to the outer pant structure along portions proximate the leg opening edges as set forth in [0035].
The difference between Sepello and claim 13 is the explicit recitation that the article includes an edge barrier that overlies portions of the wearer-facing surface proximate the perimeter edge within the crotch portion and effectively continues over and around the perimeter edge from the wearer-facing surface to the outward-facing surface in the crotch region, wherein the edge barrier comprises one or more section(s) of liquid impermeable edge sealing strip material joined to the barrier layer proximate the perimeter edge, or, wherein the edge barrier comprises an extension of the barrier layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the article of Sepello with an edge barrier as claimed because Sepello acknowledges that a strip of hydrophobic tape may be affixed via adhesive along the inside leg opening edges and wrapped about the edges and around the outward-facing layer thereby sealing the edges of the layers at the leg edges and providing wearer-facing strip along the leg openings in an effort to hinder urine flow as set forth in [0080].
With reference to claim 14, Sepello teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 13.
Sepello discloses that the gusset assembly is affixed to the outer pant structure at forward and rearward seam [0035] and that the article includes first and second lengths as claimed as shown in the figures.
The difference between Sepello and claims 14-15 is the provision that the first length is equal to or greater than the second length (cl. 14) or less than the second length (cl. 15).
Sepello teaches an article that is identical to that claimed in that the multiple layers and/or barriers may include elastic material as set forth throughout the disclosure, see for example, [0061-0063] and [0079-0080].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adjust the elasticity/elongation of the layer(s) and/or barriers of the article to impart the desired result since the general disclosure of adjusting the elastic elongation capabilities has already been set forth by Sepello in [0079].
As to claim 18, Sepello discloses a durable absorbent pant wherein the gusset assembly further comprises a gusset backing layer (131d) disposed beneath the liquid-impermeable barrier layer (131c) as shown in figure 4.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beck et al. (US 2006/0070163) and further in view of over Sepello et al. (US 2021/0290447).
With reference to claim 19, Beck teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 11.
The difference between Beck and claim 19 is the provision that the gusset assembly further comprises a wearer-facing layer disposed above the absorbent layer, and wherein bonds between the wearer-facing layer and the absorbent layer are formed by thermal compression bonding that creates a pattern of z-direction depressions in the wearer-facing layer.
Sepello teaches an analogous durable absorbent pant wherein the gusset assembly further comprises a wearer-facing layer disposed above the absorbent layer, and wherein bonds between the wearer-facing layer and the absorbent layer are formed by thermal compression bonding that creates a pattern of z-direction depressions in the wearer-facing layer as set forth in [0071].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the gusset assembly of Beck with the specific configuration as taught by Sepello for purposes of holding the layers in close proximity and thereby helping maintain a desired low caliper of the structure, and enhancing fluid communication between the layers, i.e., enhancing the structure's ability to pass discharged urine from the wearer-facing layer to the underlying absorbent layer, via contact between the layers as taught by Sepello in [0071].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELE M KIDWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4935. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7AM-4PM EST.
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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at 571-270-5879. 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.
/MICHELE KIDWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights