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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-16 and 18-20 are the subject of this NON-FINAL Office Action. This is the first action on the merits.
This Application does not contain a priority claim, nor include an assignee.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (claims 1-16 and 18-20) in the reply filed on 11/06/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 17 are withdrawn as drawn to unelected inventions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112- Indefiniteness
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.
Claims 1-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The metes and bounds of “short” fibers are unclear. The specification does not define short fibers. Instead, it offers two conflicting exemplary ranges: “The short fibers, in particular the pulp short fibers, made in the at least one short-fiber generating device have a length or average length from 0.05 to 5 mm, preferably from 0.1 to 4 mm, particularly preferably from 0.1 to 3 mm” (pg. 15); versus “As used here, continuous filaments are of quasi endless length whereas fibers have shorter lengths of for example 0.1 mm to 60 mm” (pg. 4). These are two very different ranges; thus, determining the metes and bounds of the short fibers is impossible without conjecture.
Claim Rejection - 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.
Claims 1-13, 16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over DE102021118909, in view of KAWABE (US 20120270009).
It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing to apply familiar moulding techniques regularly used with nonwovens to achieve desired shaped non-woven products with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 1, DE102021118909 teaches the same nonwoven stream deposition method as here as is clear from instant Figure 1 and DE102021118909 Figure 1:
PNG
media_image1.png
972
682
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
774
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As to claim 3, DE102021118909 teaches the continuous-filament/air stream meets the short-fiber/air stream at an acute angle of 10° to 80° (“A particularly preferred embodiment of the invention is characterized in that the angle α1 and/or the angle α2 is greater than 10°, particularly preferably greater than 20° and very particularly preferably greater than 25°”).
As to claim 4, DE102021118909 teaches there are two of the spinnerets generating respective continuous-filament/air streams that are merged with the short-fiber/air stream (Fig. 1).
As to claim 5, DE102021118909 teaches the continuous-filament air streams meet the short-fiber/air stream at acute angles of 10° to 80° and symmetrically flank the short-fiber/air stream (Fig. 1; claim 3, above).
As to claim 6, DE102021118909 teaches the continuous filaments are made from polypropylene and/or polyethylene (“Within the scope of the invention and in the exemplary embodiment, the thermoplastic may be polypropylene”).
As to claim 7, DE102021118909 teaches the continuous filaments are made from polylactide and/or polyethylene terephthalate and/or polyvinyl alcohol (“it is preferred that continuous filaments are produced from at least one polyolefin. The at least one polyolefin is recommended to be polypropylene and/or polyethylene, preferably polypropylene. In principle, the endless filaments can also be produced from other thermoplastics such as polyesters, for example polyethylene terephthalate, or polyamide, and also from mixtures of the thermoplastics mentioned above”).
As to claim 8, DE102021118909 teaches the fiberizer has an outlet from which the short-fiber/air stream is emitted downward toward the conveyor (Fig. 1).
As to claim 9, DE102021118909 teaches the short fibers are of pulp, bagasse, cellulose, bamboo, cotton, or agricultural waste (“short pulp fibers” of e.g. cellulose).
As to claim 10, DE102021118909 teaches a proportion of continuous filaments in the nonwoven web and/or in the molded part is 0.5% to 35% by weight (“the proportion of continuous filaments in the deposited nonwoven fabric is between 10 and 35% by weight, preferably between 15 and 30% by weight, preferably between 20 and 28% by weight”).
As to claim 11, DE102021118909 teaches a proportion of short fibers in the deposited nonwoven web and/or in the molded part is 65% to 97% by weight (“the proportion of continuous filaments in the deposited nonwoven fabric is between 10 and 35% by weight, preferably between 15 and 30% by weight, preferably between 20 and 28% by weight”).
As to claim 13, DE102021118909 teaches further comprising, after forming the nonwoven web on the conveyor and before setting the nonwoven web in the press, the steps of detaching the nonwoven web from the conveyor and roll the detached nonwoven web up into a roll; thereafter unrolling the web from the roll so a portion of it can be set in the press (“According to an alternative preferred embodiment of the method according to the invention, the nonwoven fabric or the nonwoven web is consolidated “offline” by the at least one calender. In the context of the invention, this means in particular that the nonwoven or the nonwoven web is removed from the depositing sieve belt and wound up after being deposited on the depositing sieve belt and only unwound again at a later point in time and fed to the at least one calender”).
As to claim 18, the product is a 2D or 3D shape (Fig. 6).
As to claim 20, pulp, e.g. cellulose, is biodegradable (see claim 9, above).
DE102021118909 does not explicitly teach a hot press mold 30-275C at 1MPa or greater; or claims 2, 12 or 16.
However, 2-part press mold at 30-275°C at 1MPa or greater, including stacks of nonwoven layers was routine in the art. For example, KAWABE teaches multi-layer nonwovens (Fig. 1 and para. 0024, for example) that are press molded at 270°C at 2 MPa by a tope and bottom mold (para. 0236; Fig. 20), among other options (e.g. 80°C at 1 MPa, para. 0239). A skilled artisan would have been familiar with and motivated to apply such familiar molding options to other nonwovens to achieve desired shapes.
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing to apply familiar nonwoven 2-part hot molding at pressure techniques to other nonwovens to achieve desired shapes with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 14-15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over DE102021118909, in view of KAWABE (US 20120270009), in further view of DE 102019109911 A1.
Neither DE102021118909 nor KAWABE explicitly teaches the barrier technique of claims 14-15 and 19.
However, this technique was familiar in the nonwoven molding art. For example, DE 102019109911 teaches barrier films formed on nonwovens to prevent liquid or gas escape of nonwoven products (Abstract). The barrier films are formed on the nonwoven before/during molding (Fig. 2). A skilled artisan would have been familiar with these familiar barrier films for nonwovens to achieve gas, fat and liquid barriers on the finished nonwoven product.
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing to apply familiar nonwoven barrier films to other nonwovens to achieve desired impermeability with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELODY TSUI whose telephone number is (571)272-1846. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/YUNG-SHENG M TSUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743