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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 May 22, 2026 has been entered.
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:
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.
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 68-69, 71-74, 78, 80-81, 83-84, 86-87, 89-90, 92-93, 95 and 98-99 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a (1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Rouse et al., (hereinafter Rouse’465), United State Patent No. 10,428,465 and evidenced by Hongjia et al., (hereinafter Hongjia) in “Chemical composition and characterization of cellulose for Agave as a fast growing, drought-tolerant biofuels feedstock.”
With regard to claims 68-69, 71-74 and 80-81, 83-84, 86-87, 89-90, Rouse’465 discloses tissue products comprising agave fibers and methods of producing the same. Rouse’465 teaches fiber derived from: non-wood plants of the genus Agave, of the family Asparagaceae, such as, Agave tequilana, Agave sisalana and Agave fourcroydes, and part of the succulent family as-well, which may be used in the manufacture of tissue products without sacrificing important tissue properties such as strength, durability, bulk and stiffness. The tissues can be single or multi-ply; see column 2, lines 54-55 and column 7, lines 19-33. Rouse’465 teaches tissues comprising agave fiber, having a geometric mean tensile (GMT) from about 600 g/3” to about 1,200 g/3” (converts to about 77 N/m to 155 N/m), sheet bulk greater than about 12.0 cc/q, and a stiffness index of less than about; see column. 1, line 47 to column 2, line 5. In an embodiment, it provides a tissue product comprising at least about 16 wt.% of the tissue product, high yield agave fiber, and comprising less than about 35 wt.% of the tissue product, long average fiber length wood pulp fibers, such as NSWK and SSW, the tissue product having a sheet bulk greater than about 12.0 cc/g, a Stiffness Index less than about 10.0 and a CD Durability greater than about 13.0; see column, 2, lines 11-18. The single-ply through-air dried tissue product has a basis weight from about 35 to about 45 g/m2; see column 2, lines 25-27, but also teaches that the formation of facial tissues; see column 2, lines 51-55, which are known to have basis weight of less than 30 gsm1. Rouse’465teaches the making of the same product as claimed in the specification and previous claims 96-97, now cancelled; see column 2, lines 51-55. Although Rouse’465 does not explicitly teach the absorbency, this property must inherently be within the claimed range, since the products are made using the same raw materials at the same or overlapping amounts and using the same process as disclosed. The hemicellulose and lignin content of Asparagaceae, such as, Agave tequilana, Agave sisalana and Agave fourcroydes are within the claimed range as evidenced by table 1 on page 4952 of Hongjia.
With regard to claims 78 and 80, Rouse’465 teaches that the high yield agave fiber used has a fiber length of 1.1 mm; see Table 1 on column 6.
Regarding to claims 90, 92-93 and 95, Rouse’465 discloses the use of fibers, see column 5, lines 14-58, which are inherently never-dried fibers, i.e., never been previously used or used as a dry-market pulp.
It seems that the reference teaches all the limitations of the claims or at the very least the minor modification(s) to obtain the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 68-69, 71-74, 78, 80-81, 83-84, 86-87, 89-90, 92-93, 95 and 98-99 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a (1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Rouse et al., (hereinafter Rouse’109), WO 2018/156109 A1 as evidenced by Hongjia, cited above.
With regard to claims 68-69, 71-74 and 80-81, 83-84, 86-87, 89-90, Rouse’109 discloses tissue products comprising agave fibers and methods of producing the same. Rouse teaches fiber derived from: non-wood plants including Agave tequilana, Agave sisalana, Agave fourcroydes, Phyllostachys edulis, Bambusa vulgaris, Phyllostachys nigra, etc.; see page 3, lines 17-21, along with wood fibers. Rouse’109 teaches that the non-wood fibers are added in amounts between 5 to 50% by weight; see page 2, line 11 through page 3, line 9 and page 8, lines 18-25, and teaches that the tissues can be single or multi-ply; see page 6, lines 9-13 and page 11, lines 3-12. Although Rouse’109 teaches basis weight greater than 30 gsm, but Rouse’109 also teaches that the tissues can be also to facial tissues; see page 5, lines 25-28 and it is well-known that such tissues have basis weight of less than 30 gsm and teaches tissues comprising non-wood fibers, having a geometric mean tensile (GMT) from about 500 g/3” to about 1,200 g/3” (converts to about 64 N/m to 155 N/m); see paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7. Rouse’109 teaches the making of the same product as claimed disclosed; see page 5, lines 25-28. Although Rouse does not explicitly teach the absorbency, this property must inherently be within the claimed range, since the products are made using the same raw materials at the same or overlapping amounts and using the same process as disclosed. As to the amount of Hemicellulose, Rouse’109 teaches the use of agave which includes succulents and have hemicellulose and lignin content within eth claimed range; (Hongjia table 1 on page 4952).
With regard to claims 78 and 80, Rouse’109 teaches that the non-wood fibers used has a fiber length between 1.0 to 3 mm; see paragraph bridging pages 8 and 9 and teaches the Agave fiber used has length within the claimed range, 1.0-3.0; see page 20, lines 1-3.
Regarding to claims 90, 92-93 and 95, Rouse’109 discloses the use of never-dried non-wood, since Rouse’109 teaches the use of Bamboo that has been Kraft pulped, no secondary or re-pulped non-wood fibers. The same is shown for the wood pulp/fibers; see examples, starting on page 17.
With regard to claims 98-99, Rouse teaches the use of the Poaceae family; see page 5, line 23.
It seems that the reference teaches all the limitations of the claims or at the very least the minor modification(s) to obtain the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 68-69, 71-74, 78, 80-81, 83-84, 86-87, 89-90, 92-93, 95 and 98-99 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in the art of “Tissue Paper Material and Tissue Paper Product including Non-Wood Fibres.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE A FORTUNA whose telephone number is (571)272-1188. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY- FRIDAY 11:30 PM- 9:00 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. 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.
/JOSE A FORTUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
JAF
1 Facial tissue typically has a basis weight between 14 and 20 grams per square meter (gsm). This low basis weight contributes to the softness and absorbency of facial tissues. The specific weight can vary slightly depending on the manufacturer and product specifications, but this range is common for facial tissue and paper handkerchiefs according to Wikipedia
Prosecution Insights