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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 10, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 9, 11-12, and 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Stabelfeldt et al. 2010/0168705 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Stabelfeldt discloses a disposable pant-type article (abstract, fig 8), the article having a longitudinal direction and a transverse direction, with a longitudinal center line extending in the longitudinal direction (see annotated figures below), the article comprising:
a front body panel (or region 22, [0042], see annotated figure below) being elastically stretchable in the transverse direction ([0044]), the front body panel having a front waist edge, a front crotch edge (see annotated figure below)) opposite the front waist edge and a first and a second longitudinal side edge (see annotated figure below);
a rear body panel (or region 26, [0042], see annotated figure below) being elastically stretchable in the transverse direction ([0044]), the rear body panel having a rear waist edge, a rear crotch edge opposite the rear waist edge and a first and a second longitudinal side edge (see annotated figure below);
a crotch region being located between the front panel crotch edge and the rear panel crotch edge, the crotch region being contiguous with the front body panel along the front panel crotch edge and being contiguous with the rear body panel along the rear panel crotch edge (see annotated figure below);
wherein the first longitudinal side edge of the front body panel is joined to the first longitudinal side edge of the rear body panel in a first side seam and the second longitudinal side edge of the front body panel is joined to the second longitudinal side edge of the rear body panel in a second side seam, the article having a waist opening and a first and a second leg opening, the first leg opening being bordered by a first leg edge and the second leg opening being bordered by a second leg edge, each of the first and the second leg edges being constituted by a front leg edge section a crotch leg edge section and a rear leg edge section (see annotated figures below and [0053]);
the front body panel comprises a front panel web being elastically stretchable in the transverse direction ([0044]), the front leg edge section of each of the first and the second leg edge being arranged in the elastically stretchable front panel web (see annotated figure below);
the rear body panel comprising a rear panel web being elastically stretchable in the transverse direction ([0044]), the rear leg edge section of each of the first and the second leg edge being arranged in the elastically stretchable rear panel web (see annotated figure below);
the crotch region comprising a crotch region web [0056], the crotch leg edge section of each of the first and the second leg edge being arranged in the crotch region web from the front crotch edge to the rear crotch edge (see annotated figure below);
wherein each front leg edge section having an inner point being located on the front leg edge section at a greater distance from the corresponding side seam than from the longitudinally extending center line, and an outer point, the outer point constituting an endpoint of the front leg edge section being located at the corresponding side seam (see annotated figures below), a distance between the inner point of the front leg edge section and the front waist edge being the smallest distance between the front leg edge section and the front waist edge and being smaller than a distance between the outer point of the front leg edge section and the front waist edge (see annotated figure below, see the curve which makes the pof1 longer from the wait edge than the pif1); and each crotch leg edge section having an intermediate point located between the front crotch edge and the rear crotch edge which intermediate point is closer to the longitudinal center line than a front endpoint of the crotch leg edge section where the leg edge intersects with the front crotch edge (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
747
875
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
519
592
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the distance between the outer point (Pof1, Pof2) of each front leg edge section and the front waist edge constitutes the greatest distance between the front leg edge section and the front waist edge in a part of the front leg edge section which is defined between the inner point of the front leg edge section and the side seam (see annotated figure 9 above Pof1 and Pif1 are on a curved section of the front of the article as such Pof1 clearly has a greatest distance between the front leg edge section and the front waist edge).
Regarding claim 6, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the intermediate point on each crotch leg edge section is closer to the longitudinal center line than a rear end point of the crotch leg edge section where the leg edge intersects with the rear crotch edge (see annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 9, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein each rear leg edge section has a buttocks portion with a convex curvature (see curvature by the rear leg edge on fig 9 annotated above).
Regarding claim 11, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the article further comprises an absorbent assembly (36, [0045]), the absorbent assembly comprising an absorbent core, a liquid permeable topsheet and a liquid impermeable backsheet, the absorbent core being enclosed between the liquid permeable topsheet and the liquid impermeable backsheet ([0045] which discloses the formation of the absorbent assembly).
Regarding claim 12, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the intermediate point on each crotch leg edge section is arranged on a side edge of the absorbent assembly (see annotated figure 9 above where the pad overlaps the leg edges).
Regarding claim 18, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the crotch region web is a non-stretchable material, such as a non-stretchable nonwoven web ([0075] notes the elastic laminate is discontinuous in the crotch region).
Regarding claim 19, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the elastically stretchable front panel web and/or the elastically stretchable rear panel web comprises or consists of an elastic laminate, the elastic laminate comprising at least a first layer of non-stretchable fibrous material and an elastic layer ([0045] which discloses the laminate has an elastic layer and a non-woven).
Regarding claim 20, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the elastic laminate comprises a second layer of fibrous material and the elastic layer is an intermediate elastic layer arranged between the first and second layers of fibrous material ([0045] the elastic is between two layers).
Regarding claim 21, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the elastic layer comprises or consists of a layer of elastic film ([0045]).
Regarding claim 22, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein the elastic layer comprises or consists of a layer of elastic nonwoven material ([0045]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 3- 5, 7-8, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Stabelfeldt et al. 2010/0168705 A1.
Regarding claim 3, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein a distance between each inner point on each front leg edge section and the longitudinally extending center line is 30 to 50 % of a distance between the longitudinally extending center line and the corresponding side seam, the distances being measured in the transverse direction, perpendicular to the longitudinally extending center line.
However, based on Stabelfeldt’s figures one of ordinary skill could reasonably teach that the distance between each inner point on each front leg edge section and the longitudinally extending center line is 30 to 50 % of a distance between the longitudinally extending center line and the corresponding side seam (MPEP 2125). The points appear to be subjective and not based on where two parts join for example. The points are based on the articles overall shape which one of ordinary skill could reasonably adjust to find an improved fit (MPEP 2144.04, IV).
Regarding claim 4, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose, wherein the inner point on each front leg edge section is arranged closer to the front waist edge than the outer point by at least 5 millimeters and by at most 40 millimeters.
Regarding claim 5, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein the inner point on each front leg edge section is arranged closer to the front waist edge than the outer point by at most 20 millimeters.
Regarding claim 4 and 5:
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Stabelfeldt et al. to have a maximum distance of at most 20 millimeters since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Stabelfeldt et al. would not operate differently with the claimed dimension and since the undergarment is meant to be sized to a range of individuals. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the distance between the points and front edge “may” be within the claimed ranges (specification page 3 and 5).
Regarding claim 7, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein the distance between the intermediate point on each crotch leg edge section and the longitudinal center line is smaller than the distance between the front endpoint and the longitudinal center line by from 2 millimeters to 30 millimeters.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Stabelfeldt et al. to have the intermediate point on each crotch leg edge section and the longitudinal center line is smaller than the distance between the front endpoint and the longitudinal center line (Lc) by from 2 millimeters to 30 millimeters. Since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Stabelfeldt et al. would not operate differently with the claimed dimension and since the undergarment is meant to be sized to a range of individuals. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the distance between the points and front edge “may” be within the claimed ranges (specification page 3 and 6).
Regarding claim 8, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein the distance between the intermediate point on each crotch leg edge section and the longitudinal center line is smaller than the distance between the rear endpoint and the longitudinal center line by from 5 millimeters to 60 millimeters.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Stabelfeldt et al. to have the intermediate point on each crotch leg edge section and the longitudinal center line is smaller than the distance between the front endpoint and the longitudinal center line is smaller than the distance between the rear endpoint and the longitudinal center line by from 5 millimeters to 60 millimeters. Since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Stabelfeldt et al. would not operate differently with the claimed dimension and since the undergarment is meant to be sized to a range of individuals. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the distance between the points and front edge “may” be within the claimed ranges (specification page 3 and 6).
Regarding claim 10, Stabelfeldt discloses wherein each rear leg edge section has a transition point where the convex curvature of the buttocks portion of the rear leg edge section changes into a linear hip portion or into a hip portion having a concave curvature (see annotated figure 9 above).
Stabelfeldt fails to disclose the transition point being located at a distance from the corresponding side seam, such as at a distance of from 30 millimeters to 100 millimeters from the corresponding side seam.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Stabelfeldt et al. to have the transition point being located at a distance from the corresponding side seam, such as at a distance of from 30 millimeters to 100 millimeters from the corresponding side seam. Since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Stabelfeldt et al. would not operate differently with the claimed dimension and since the undergarment is meant to be sized to a range of individuals. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the distance between the points and front edge “such as” be within the claimed ranges (specification page 7).
Claim(s) 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Stabelfeldt et al. 2010/0168705 A1 in further view of Igaue et al. US 4743241.
Regarding claim 13, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein a pre-tensioned first crotch elastic member is arranged extending in the longitudinal direction along the first leg edge between the front crotch edge and the rear crotch edge and a pre-tensioned second crotch elastic member is arranged extending in the longitudinal direction along the second leg edge between the front crotch edge and the rear crotch edge.
Regarding claim 14, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein the intermediate point on each crotch leg edge section is arranged on a side edge of the corresponding crotch elastic member.
Regarding claim 15, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein each crotch elastic member has a smallest width at the intermediate point on the crotch leg edge section.
Regarding claim 16, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein a front end portion of each of the first and the second crotch elastic member overlaps with and is attached to the front body panel and/or a rear end portion of each of the first and the second crotch elastic member overlaps with and is attached to the rear body panel.
Regarding claims 13-16:
Igaue teaches a disposable pant-type article (fig 5) thereby being in the same field of endeavor as the instant claims. Igaue teaches the addition of crotch elastic (6c) having a narrowed intermediate portion (see W2 of below illustrative diagram of Fig. 5), the narrowed intermediate portion of the crotch elastic member being formed by cutting away a portion of the material in the crotch elastic member (Col. 4 line 47 cutaway), the narrowed intermediate portion of the crotch elastic member being arranged between a front end portion and a rear end portion of the crotch elastic member (narrowed intermediate portion exists between unnarrowed portions, see W1 in below illustrative diagram, that exists in front end and rear end of absorbent article and are as such front and rear end portions) for the purpose of providing a crotch elastic member 6c that surrounds an associated cutaway area 12 that allows for simplification and higher speed production in the process of manufacturing over positioning elastic members that curve along the contour of the associated cutaway areas (Col. 4 lines 59-68) and the crotch elastic members comprising an elastic film (Col. 4 lines 25-27 plastic film exhibiting elasticity). The intermediate point would be on the side edge of the elastic due to the process of cutting away the elastic and having it on the edge of article.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the first and second crotch elastic members of Igaue that performs the function of providing elastic sealing at the periphery of leg openings for the crotch elastic members to provide an improved fit.
PNG
media_image3.png
418
628
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Stabelfeldt et al. 2010/0168705 A1 in further view of Mukai et al. US 2019/0328586 A1.
Regarding claim 17, Stabelfeldt fails to disclose wherein a first reinforcing elastic feature is arranged on the elastically stretchable rear body panel along at least a first part of the rear leg edge section of the first leg edge and a second reinforcing elastic feature is arranged on the elastically stretchable rear body panel along at least a first part of the rear leg edge section of the second leg edge.
Mukai discloses a pant-type article thereby being in the same field of endeavor as the instant claims. Mukai discloses leg elastic members in the leg opening section on the rear body (fig 2 and [0099], element 36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have added additional elastic in the leg section of the rear panel to provide a better fit as taught by Mukai [0099].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIELLA E BURNETTE whose telephone number is (571)272-9574. The examiner can normally be reached M-S: 0830-1900 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.
/GABRIELLA E BURNETTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/REBECCA E EISENBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3781