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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6 July 2026 has been entered.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otaguro et al., JP 2000-239699 (see English translation) in view of Shimizu, JP 2019-157319 A (see English translation) and in further view of Tanaka, JP 2016-189847 A (see English translation) and Sheehan et al., US 8,557,722.
Regarding claim 1, Otaguro et al. disclose a cleaning wet wipe (see English translation of the Abstract) that is obtained by impregnating a base paper sheet with a chemical agent (cleaning liquid, see English translation of the Abstract), wherein the chemical agent has a hydrogen ion exponent of 8.0 to 9.0 (see English translation, pH range from 5 to 9) and contains 0.05% by mass to 0.15% by mass of polyoxyethylene alkyl ether (see English translation discussion of the surfactant, also 0.01% by weight to 10% by weight) and 5.00% by mass to 15.00% by mass of ethanol (see English translation discussion of the solvent, 0.01% to 10% by weight). Regarding claim 2, the chemical agent contains 8.00% by mass to 12.00% by mass of ethanol (in that the range is 0.01% to 10% by weight, see English translation discussion of the solvent). However, Otaguro et al. does not explicitly disclose that the chemical agent contains 8.00% by mass to 12.00% by mass of ethanol, rather teaches a range of 0.01% to 10% by weight which overlaps the range claimed by Otaguro et al. In addition, Otaguro et al. is silent as to whether the wipe comprises embossment blocks.
Further regarding claim 1, Shimizu teaches a cleaning wipe of paper (10; see English translation, see English translation of Abstract) comprising a plurality of diamond-shaped embossment blocks (groupings of embossments, see Figures 2 and 5a-5b), in each of which a plurality of convex embossments that are embossments having convexity in a first surface of the cleaning wet wipe (Figure 4, see English translation), and a plurality of concave embossments that are embossments having a convexity in a second surface of the cleaning wet wipe (opposite side, see Figures 4 and 5a-5b); and a non-embossment part where the embossments are not arranged (linear parts along/beside rows of blocks, Figures 2 and 5a-5b), between other ones of the embossment blocks which are adjacent (linear parts along/beside rows of blocks, Figures 2 and 5a-5b); wherein: the embossment blocks, which are a plurality of embossment blocks, are continuously arranged and form embossment block rows from a first side to a second side opposite to the first side (see Figures 2 and 5a-5b); wherein the embossment block rows, which are a plurality of embossment block rows, are continuously arranged from a third side perpendicularly intersection the first side to a fourth side opposite to the third side (Figures 2 and 5a-5b), the non-embossment part is provided at a proportion of not less than 25% and not more than 50% with respect to an area of the cleaning wet wipe (area Sa is non-embossed area, Sa is 10% to 35%, ratio of embossed region to non-embossed region is 2.5:1 to 3.5:1, see English translation), and the convex embossments are arranged such that at least one of the convex embossments is present on a straight line extended perpendicularly from an arbitrary point on the third side to the fourth side (see Figures 2 and 5a-5b), and the concave embossments are arranged such that at least one of the concave embossments is present on a line extended from an arbitrary point on the third side to the fourth side (Figures 4 and 5a-5b); an angle formed between a long axis direction of the embossments and a first direction that perpendicularly intersects the first side is not less than 5 degrees and not more than 45 degrees (at 45 degrees, Figure 5b). Shimizu teaches that the embossment blocks improve absorption of the cleaning paper (see English translation, Abstract and Background Art) and that sides of the embossments aid in scraping dirt from a surface (see English translation). Shimizu discusses that the shape of the embossments may be one from a list including triangle, quadrilateral, pentagon, hexagon (see English translation). Shimizu does not disclose that the embossments have oval shapes and narrowed parts at centers thereof in a long axis direction or that the angle formed between the long axis direction of the embossments and the first direction that perpendicularly intersects the first side is not less than 15 degrees and not more than 35 degrees.
Further regarding claim 1, Tanaka teach a cleaning wet wipe constructed of paper (Abstract) that comprises embossments (EM11, see Figures and English translation), the embossments are “gourd-shaped” that describes an oval shape with narrowed parts at centers thereof in a long axis direction (best shown in Figures 3 and 4a, also see English translation). Tanaka describes this shape as being advantageous so that when the paper wipe is folded, that the wipe maintains its surface strength and bulkiness (see English translation of Abstract and Description).
Further regarding claim 1, Sheehan et al. teach a nonwoven wipe (10, Abstract) having a pattern (20) of embossments (30) of various shapes (column 6 lines 42-46), an angle formed between a long axis direction of the embossments and a first direction that perpendicularly intersects the first side is not less than 15 degrees and not more than 35 degrees (the embossments on the wipe are at an angle of 30 degrees relative to a machine direction, column 6 lines 46-50, 45 degrees is shown in the Figures) to control cross-direction bending behavior of the wipe (column 6 lines 42-46, column 3 lines 35-49).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the % by mass of ethanol in the chemical agent of Otaguro et al. to be within the range of 8.00% by mass to 12.00% by mass of the chemical agent since it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Also, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cleaning wet wipe of Otaguro et al. so that it comprises diamond-shaped embossment blocks with a plurality of convex embossments in a first surface and form embossment block rows, and a plurality of concave embossments having a convexity in a second surface of the cleaning wet wipe, as taught by Shimizu, in order to improve the absorption abilities of the cleaning wipe and to also improve cleaning effectiveness as the edges of embossments scrape surfaces during cleaning. Further, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-embossment part range taught by Shimizu such that the non-embossment part is provided at a proportion of not less than 25% and not more than 50% with respect to an area of the cleaning wet wipe since it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Further, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cleaning wet wipe of Otaguro et al. and Shimizu so that the embossments have oval shapes and have narrowed parts at substantial centers thereof in a long axis direction, as taught by Tanaka, so that when the wipe is folded during use that it maintains its strength and bulkiness. Even further, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the angle formed between a long axis direction of the embossments and a first direction that perpendicularly intersects the first side of Otaguro et al. as modified by Shimizu and Tanaka so that the angle is 30 degrees, as taught by Sheehan et al. to achieve a desired control cross-direction bending behavior of the wipe.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, 8 June 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Sheehan et al., US 8,557,722.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Laura C Guidotti whose telephone number is (571)272-1272. The examiner can normally be reached typically M-F, 6am-9am, 10am-4:30pm.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/LAURA C GUIDOTTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
lcg
Prosecution Insights