DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
WITHDRAWN REJECTION
2. The office actions mailed on 09/15/2025 have been withdrawn by the examiner.
Amendment
3. The amendment filed on 08/28/2025 has been entered into this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 1, 10-11, 14, 16-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Patent Pub. No. 2021/0007912 A1 by Swedberg et al. (hereinafter Swedberg) in view of JP2002350731A by Kususe et al. (hereinafter Kususe).
Regarding Claim 1, Swedberg teaches a method of forming protrusions (Fig. 10 @ 520, hooks, Par. [0101]). Also see Par. [0004, 0058, 0064, 0099-0102]) in a portion (Fig. 10 @ 202, Par. [0101]) of a substrate (Fig. 10-11 @ 200, Par. [0099-0102]. Also see Par. [0004, 0058, 0064]) comprising:
providing a first device (Fig. 10 @ 500, Par. [0099-0102]) comprising an outer surface (Fig. 10 @ 500, illustrates outer surface at 520);
providing a second device (Fig. 10 @ 400, Par. [0099-0102]) comprising a source of vibration energy (Par. [0008, 0058, 0100]);
forming a nip (Fig. 10 @ 200, between 400 and 500) between the source of vibration energy (Fig. 10 @ 400, Par. [0099-0102]) and the outer surface (Fig. 10 @ 500, Par. [0099-0102]);
conveying the substrate (Fig. 10-11 @ 200, Par. [0099-0102]) through the nip (Fig. 10 @ 200, between 400 and 500);
forming the protrusions (Fig. 10 @ 520, hooks, Par. [0101]) in the portion (Fig. 10 @ 202, Par. [0101]) of the substrate (Fig. 10-11 @ 200, Par. [0099-0102]) in the nip (Fig. 10 @ 200, between 400 and 500) using the source of vibration energy (Fig. 10 @ 400, Par. [0099-0102]); and
inspecting one or more characteristics of the substrate (Fig. 10-11 @ 200, Par. [0099-0102]) using a vision system (Par. [0101]: The correct position may for example be verified by means of a vision system), but does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more characteristics comprises a defect; and
marking the detected defect on the substrate.
However, Kususe teaches inspecting the one or more characteristics comprises a defect (Fig. 3-4, Par. [0007]: observing a defect present in the surface area of the substrate); and
marking the detected defect on the substrate (Fig. 3-4, Par. [0007]: observing a defect present in the surface area of the substrate, a step of scanning the surface of the substrate to be inspected to detect the defect, and a step of marking near the defect to indicate the position of the detected defect It is characterized by having).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Swedberg by Kususe as taught above such that the one or more characteristics comprises a defect; and marking the detected defect on the substrate is accomplished in order to easily find the defect (Kususe, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 10, Swedberg as modified by Kususe teaches the inspecting step (See Claim 1 rejection) winding the substrate (implicitly teaches);
conveying the substrate into a separate manufacturing operation (Kususe, Par. [0007]: re-observing the defect or using another observation device such as a scanning microscope or an atomic force microscope. When observing a minute defect in detail, it is important to observe it at a higher magnification with another device with a different optical system thus teaches conveying the substrate into a separate manufacturing operation); and
identifying the one or more characteristics of the substrate on the separate manufacturing operation (Kususe, Par. [0007]: re-observing the defect or using another observation device such as a scanning microscope or an atomic force microscope. When observing a minute defect in detail, it is important to observe it at a higher magnification with another device with a different optical system thus teaches the limitation) but does not explicitly teach winding the substrate.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, winding the substrate for portability in order to obtain a predictable result.
The examiner takes Official Notice that winding the substrate is well-known, or to be common knowledge in the art is capable of instant and unquestionable demonstration as being well-known. As noted by the court in In re Ahlert, 424 F.2d 1088, 1091, 165 USPQ 418,420 (CCPA 1970).
Regarding Claim 11, Swedberg as modified by Kususe teaches separating out portions of the substrate having certain of the one or more characteristics (Kususe, Par. [0012]: Since only the specularly reflected light reflected on the surface area of the substrate to be inspected is incident on each light receiving element of the linear image sensor 23, if a minute defect exists on the surface area of the substrate, the incident inspection light is scattered by the defect. Or, it is diffracted and deviates from the regular optical path and does not enter the light receiving element. Therefore, the output signal intensity from the light receiving element at the time of scanning the defective portion is lower than the output signal intensity at the time of scanning the normal surface area thus teaches the limitation).
Regarding Claim 14, Swedberg as modified by Kususe teaches providing a light source to the substrate during the inspecting step, wherein the light source is provided on a first side of the substrate or on the second side of the substrate (Par. [0007]: when observing a defect existing in a surface area of a substrate, a first observation step of scanning the surface of the substrate to be inspected with a light beam to detect the defect).
Regarding Claim 16, Swedberg as modified by Kususe teaches the inspecting the substrate comprises capturing and storing an electronic image of the one or more characteristics (Kususe, Par. [0012]: In this defect inspection, the defect and its address coordinates are detected, and the existence of the defect and its address coordinates are stored in the memory device).
Regarding Claim 17, Swedberg as modified by Kususe teaches inspecting the substrate the one or more characteristics of the substrate (See Claim 1 rejection) but does not explicitly teach comprises using a particle filter to evaluate.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a particle filter for filtering in order to obtain a predictable result.
The examiner takes Official Notice that a particle filter is well-known, or to be common knowledge in the art is capable of instant and unquestionable demonstration as being well-known. As noted by the court in In re Ahlert, 424 F.2d 1088, 1091, 165 USPQ 418,420 (CCPA 1970).
Regarding Claim 19, Swedberg teaches the one or more characteristics comprises a number of protrusions, a number of properly formed protrusions, a positive aspect of the substrate, or a negative aspect of the substrate (Fig. 10 @ 520, hooks).
6. Claims 2-6, 9, 12-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Swedberg in view of Kususe as applied to Claim 1 above and further in view of US Patent Pub. No. 2017/0265602 A1 by Rocha (hereinafter Rocha).
Regarding Claim 2, Swedberg teaches substrate (See Claim 1 rejection) but does not explicitly teach imparting thermal energy to the portion of the substrate upstream of the nip to heat the portion of the substrate to a temperature below a melting temperature of the portion of the substrate, wherein the temperature below the melting temperature of the portion of the substrate is in a range of about 90 degrees C to about 160 degrees C.
However, Rocha teaches imparting thermal energy to the portion of the substrate upstream of the nip to heat the portion of the substrate to a temperature below a melting temperature of the portion of the substrate, wherein the temperature below the melting temperature of the portion of the substrate is in a range of about 90 degrees C to about 160 degrees C (Par. [0050]: the vibrating source may not melt and may therefore retain most, if not all, of its' original properties, in other words, not be subjected to a heat history which might detract from its' original properties thus teaches the limitation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Swedberg as modified by Kususe by Rocha as taught above such that imparting thermal energy to the portion of the substrate upstream of the nip to heat the portion of the substrate to a temperature below a melting temperature of the portion of the substrate, wherein the temperature below the melting temperature of the portion of the substrate is in a range of about 90 degrees C to about 160 degrees C is accomplished in order to retain its’ original properties (Rocha, Par. [0050]).
Regarding Claim 3, Swedberg teaches substrate (See Claim 1 rejection) but does not explicitly teach the second device comprises a rotary sonotrode, wherein the vibration energy is ultrasonic energy, and wherein the source of vibration energy applies the ultrasonic energy to the substrate intermittently or continuously.
However, Rocha teaches the second device comprises a rotary sonotrode (Fig. 9, 13 @ 13, Par. [0047, 0073, 0081]), wherein the vibration energy is ultrasonic energy, and wherein the source of vibration energy applies the ultrasonic energy to the substrate intermittently or continuously (Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Swedberg as modified by Kususe by Rocha as taught above such that the second device comprises a rotary sonotrode, wherein the vibration energy is ultrasonic energy, and wherein the source of vibration energy applies the ultrasonic energy to the substrate intermittently or continuously is accomplished in order to obtain a predictable result.
Regarding Claim 4, Swedberg as modified by Kususe as modified by Rocha teaches the second device (See Claim 1 rejection) comprises a blade sonotrode (Rocha, Fig. 9, 13 @ 13, Par. [0047]: vibrating ultrasonic horn, for example. These horns may be made from metals such as aluminum or titanium and are sold in the United States by companies such as Branson Ultrasonics, Dukane or Sonitek (Note: these companies make blade sonotrode horn), and in Europe by a company such as Mecasonics), wherein the vibration energy is ultrasonic energy, and wherein the source of vibration energy applies the ultrasonic energy to the substrate intermittently or continuously (Rocha, Abstract. See Claim 3 rejection for 5-steps).
Regarding Claim 5, Swedberg as modified by Kususe as modified by Rocha teaches a plurality of recesses in the outer surface of the first device (Rocha, Fig. 1 @ 17, Abstract: plurality of cavity, Par. [0008, 0046]), wherein the recesses have a shape (Rocha, Par. [0045]) configured to produce the protrusions which are suitable for use in a touch fastener (Rocha, Par. [0002-0003, 0046]. Note: 5-steps omitted due to same motivation).
Regarding Claim 6, Swedberg as modified by Kususe as modified by Rocha teaches the vision system (See Claim 1 rejection) positioning the vision system downstream of the nip (See Rocha, Fig. 1 @ 19, 21, it is obvious to position the vision system downstream of the nip such that defect can be detected. Note: 5-steps omitted due to same motivation).
Regarding Claim 9, Swedberg as modified by Kususe as modified by Rocha teaches the one or more characteristics comprises proper formation of the protrusions (Rocha, Fig. 1, Par. [0016-0017, 0019, 0047]. Note: 5-steps omitted due to same motivation).
Regarding Claim 12, Swedberg as modified by Kususe as modified by Rocha teaches the inspecting step and conveying the substrate into an absorbent article manufacturing line (Rocha, Par. [0064]) (Also see Swedberg, Title, Abstract); and
identifying the one or more characteristics of the substrate on the absorbent article manufacturing line (See Claim 1 rejection) winding the substrate after the inspecting step (See Claim 10 rejection).
Regarding Claim 13, Swedberg as modified by Kususe as modified by Rocha separating out portions of the substrate having certain of the one or more characteristics (See Claim 11 rejection).
Regarding Claim 15, Swedberg as modified by Kususe as modified by Rocha teaches the one or more characteristics comprises holes or lack thereof in the substrate (Rocha, Title, Abstract. Note: 5-steps omitted due to same motivation).
7. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Swedberg in view of Kususe as applied to Claim 1 above and further in view of US Patent Pub. No. 2007/0150084 A1 by Grubb et al. (hereinafter Grubb).
Regarding Claim 18, Swedberg as modified by Kususe teaches the one or more characteristics (See Claim 1 rejection) but does not explicitly teach tracking the one or more characteristics in a quality control system.
However, Grubb teaches tracking the one or more characteristics in a quality control system (Par. [0017]: The external systems 150 may include various systems for tracking defects in products, such as technical support systems, quality control systems, and the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Swedberg as modified by Kususe by Grubb as taught above such that tracking the one or more characteristics in a quality control system is accomplished in order to assign each of the defects one of a plurality of severity levels and one of a plurality of impact levels (Grubb, Abstract).
8. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Swedberg in view of Kususe as applied to Claim 1 above and further in view of US Patent Pub. No. JP2020085862A by Tamakoshi (hereinafter Tamakoshi).
Regarding Claim 20, Swedberg as modified by Kususe teaches the inspecting the substrate (See Claim 1 rejection) but does not explicitly teach comprises measuring dimensions of the protrusions.
However, Tamakoshi teaches measuring dimensions of the protrusions (Par. [0003, 0018, 0033-0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Swedberg as modified by Kususe by Tamakoshi as taught above such that measuring dimensions of the protrusions is accomplished in order to check the shape and dimensional accuracy of the protrusions (Tamakoshi, Par. [0003, 0018, 0034]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMIL AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1950. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Kara Geisel can be reached on 571-272-2416. 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.
/JAMIL AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877