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 § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 5, 9, 13, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ramkumar (WO 2022249195).
Regarding claim 1, Ramkumar discloses an incontinence article for a male having a penis and a scrotum and extending along a longitudinal axis (male incontinence device 100 FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9) the article comprising:
a pouch including one or more layers of nonwoven material and configured to envelop the penis (pouch 102,p10, In 4-13, p7, In 16-p8, In 3: "made of a flexible material like natural latex or polyurethane membrane"), said pouch having a first open end and a second closed end longitudinally opposed said first open end (FIG. 6, p5, In 28- p6, In 8: "the male incontinence device 100 disclosed here comprises a pouch 102 with an open end 102a and a closed end 102b"); and
a sling connected to said pouch adjacent said first open end of said pouch (holding device 104 (comprising 106a) and band 180, FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9: As shown in Figures 6, a band 180 extends from the cylindrical tube 106a"; see also FIGS. 1-2, p5, In 28- p6, In 8: "The holding mechanism 104 comprises of two cylindrical tubes 106a and 106b and a tubular sponge 108"), said sling including a loop portion configured to fit around an underside of the scrotum and the penis (see 180, FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9: "the band 180 loops around the scrotum 182"), said loop portion being extensible in at least a generally circumferential direction thereof (FIG. 6: band is flexible, and therefore extensible in all directions).
Regarding claim 2, Ramkumar discloses an incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said pouch includes an absorbent core having superabsorbent material (see core 114 or absorbent unit 112, FIGS. 1, 6, p6, In 9-24: "An absorbent powder 114 is positioned inside the absorbent unit 112, for example, sodium polyacrylate"; sodium polyacrylate is considered a SAP).
Regarding claim 5, Ramkumar discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said sling includes a proximal portion connected to said pouch (portion of 180 at 104, FIGS. 1, 6), a pair of leg portions extending from said proximal portion (vertical portions of 180, FIG. 6), and a distal portion spanning between respective terminal ends of said leg portions in a direction transverse to the longitudinal axis of the article (horizontal portion of 180 below scrotum, FIG. 6), said proximal, leg, and distal portions jointly defining said loop portion of said sling (FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 9, Ramkumar discloses the incontinence article of claim 5, wherein said leg portions and said distal portion are integrally formed with one another (see 180, FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9).
Regarding claim 13, Ramkumar discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, further comprising a pull tab adjacent said first open end of said pouch and configured for pulling said pouch toward the base of the penis (see unlabeled vertical portion of 106a, FIG. 6: note pulling comprises intended use).
Regarding claim 15, Ramkumar discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said first open end of said pouch is the only opening configured for insertion and removal of the penis into/from said pouch (FIG. 6, p5, In 28-p6, In 8: "the male incontinence device 100 disclosed here comprises a pouch 102 with an open end 102a and a closed end 102b").
Regarding claim 16, Ramkumar discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said one or more layers of nonwoven material include a hydrophilic layer and a hydrophobic layer, said hydrophilic and hydrophobic layers in an overlaying relationship with one another (102/112, FIG. 1A, 6: p7, In 16-p8, In 3: "The pouch 102, can generally be made of flexible material like natural latex or poly urethane membrane" "absorbent unit 112 p6, ln 9-24: a cellulose or poly urethane sponge": note latex naturally, hydrophobic and cellulose is naturally hydrophilic).
Claim(s) 1, 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hogin (US 4354494).
Regarding claim 1, Hogin discloses an incontinence article for a male having a penis and a scrotum and extending along a longitudinal axis (FIG. 2), the article comprising:
a pouch including one or more layers of nonwoven material and configured to envelop the penis (sheath 12, FIG. 1, col 2, In 21-25: "rubber": reasonably assuming non-woven), said pouch having a first open end and a second closed end longitudinally opposed said first open end (opening 15 closed end 14, FIG. 2, col 2, In 21-26); and
a sling connected to said pouch adjacent said first open end of said pouch (bead 18 and strap 20, FIGS. 1-4, col 2, In 21-34: "A retention strap 20 made of a resilient material includes one end portion 22 attached to the periphery 18 at one point 24 and has another end portion 26 attached to the periphery 18 at another point 28 spaced from point 24 the cross-sectional area of the upper part of bead 18 is approximately equal to the combined cross-sectional areas of lower part of the bead and the retention strap. It is preferred that the retention strap when in a relaxed condition lie adjacent the lower part of the bead"), said sling including a loop portion configured to fit around an underside of the scrotum and the penis, said loop portion being extensible in at least a generally circumferential direction thereof (20, FIGS. 1-4, col 2, In 21, col 3, In 2: "strap 20 made of a resilient material is then pulled downwardly and stretched to enable the strap to be fit over scrotum 30. When strap 20 is released, it snuggly wraps around the scrotum 30 and holds the sheath 12 of the condom in position with respect to the penis").
Regarding claim 4, Hogin discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said loop portion includes at least one elastic strand extending in the generally circumferential direction of said loop portion (20, FIGS. 1-4: 20 is considered a strand by virtue of its size/shape).
Regarding claim 5, Hogin discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said sling includes a proximal portion connected to said pouch (upper part of bead 18, FIGS. 2-3), a pair of leg portions extending from said proximal portion (end portions at 22 and 24 of strap 20, FIGS. 2-3, col 2, In 21-34), and a distal portion spanning between respective terminal ends of said leg portions in a direction transverse to the longitudinal axis of the article (remainder of 20, FIGS. 1-3), said proximal, leg, and distal portions jointly defining said loop portion of said sling (FIGS. 1-4).
Regarding claim 6, Hogin discloses the incontinence article of claim 5, wherein said proximal portion is integrally formed with said pouch (FIGS. 1-3, col 2, In 21-34: "Sheath 12 is closed at one end 14 and has an opening 16 having a periphery 18, preferably in the form of a beaded edge, at the other end thereof In one embodiment of the invention the end portions 22 and 26 of strap 20 are integral with the periphery 18 of the sheath 12").
Regarding claim 7, Hogin discloses the incontinence article of claim 5, wherein said leg portions and said distal portion have respective length dimensions, each of said leg and distal portions being extensible along said respective length dimension thereof (FIGS. 1-4, col 2, In 21, col 3, In 2: "strap 20 made of a resilient is then pulled downwardly and stretched to enable the strap to be fit over scrotum 30. When material strap 20 is released, it snuggly wraps around the scrotum 30 and holds the sheath 12 of the condom in position with respect to the penis").
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hunger (EP 0094614).
Regarding claim 1, Hunger discloses an incontinence article for a male having a penis and a scrotum and extending along a longitudinal axis (Abstract: "The invention relates to a device for collecting the urine from a male incontinence sufferer"; FIGS. 1-2), the article comprising: a pouch including one or more layers of nonwoven material and configured to envelop the penis (3/4, FIGS. 2, para[0036]: "neck 4 of collection bag 4 waterproof"; para[0022]: "the bag can be made of a thin, elastic waterproof film"; para[0030]: "inflatable cuff to seal the area between the penis and the neck of the urine collection bag"), said pouch having a first open end and a second closed end longitudinally opposed said first open end (open left end and closed bottom end, FIG. 2, para[0030]-[0031]: "The inflatable cuff used in various embodiments of the invention can serve both to seal the penis and to seal the collection bag"); and
a sling connected to said pouch adjacent said first open end of said pouch (scrotal belt 1 (holding device), FIGS. 1, para[0016]: "scrotal belt 1 with a passage opening 2 for the penis"; note connected by/at 10, FIGS. 1-2, para[0033]-[0034]: "If the holding device and the device for collecting the urine are designed to be detachable from one another, this opening is surrounded by a part of a closure 10, the counterpart 11 of which is located on the disposable collection bag According to the invention, however, the holding device and the device for collecting the urine can also be permanently connected to one another For example, the scrotal belt can be made in one piece with a bag as a means for collecting urine in one of the designs explained below"; para[0025]: "are made in one piece or are permanently connected to one another"), said sling including a loop portion configured to fit around an underside of the scrotum and the penis, said loop portion being extensible in at least a generally circumferential direction thereof (see at 1, FIGS. 1, para[0032]: "Scrotal belt, which is placed around the upper, narrowed part of the scrotum"; para[0025]: "made in one piece or are permanently connected to one another"; para[0022]: "elastic film"; note: one piece has been interpreted to mean same material (clastic film) in this context; clastic film is considered elastically extensible in all directions).
Regarding claim 5, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said sling includes a proximal portion connected to said pouch (portion seen in front view with 10, FIG. 1b), a pair of leg portions extending from said proximal portion (portions seen in side view(s), FIG. 1a), and a distal portion spanning between respective terminal ends of said leg portions in a direction transverse to the longitudinal axis of the article (back view, i.c. opposite portion seen in front view FIG. 1b), said proximal, leg, and distal portions jointly defining said loop portion of said sling (FIGS. 1)
Regarding claim 6, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 5, wherein said proximal portion is integrally formed with said pouch (para[0033]-[0034]: "According to the invention, however, the holding device and the device for collecting the urine can also be permanently connected to one another For example, the scrotal belt can be made in one piece with a bag as a means for collecting urine in one of the designs explained below").
Regarding claim 7, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 5, wherein said leg portions and said distal portion have respective length dimensions, each of said leg and distal portions being extensible along said respective length dimension thereof (para[0025],[0022]: clastic film is considered extensible in all directions).
Regarding claim 9, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 5, wherein said leg portions and said distal portion are integrally formed with one another (FIGS. 1, para[0030]-[0031]).
Regarding claim 11, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 5, wherein said proximal portion is extensible in a direction generally parallel to the longitudinal axis of the article (para[0025],[0022]: elastic film is considered extensible in all directions).
Regarding claim 13, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, further comprising a pull tab adjacent said first open end of said pouch and configured for pulling said pouch toward the base of the penis (see portion of open end of neck with velcro extending wider than neck 4, FIG. 2A; note pull comprises intended use; also note, para[0026]: "Furthermore, a lip may be provided for pulling off the device for collecting urine or the device for clamping the urethra" e.g. see FIGS. 3).
Regarding claim 15, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said first open end of said pouch is the only opening configured for insertion and removal of the penis into/from said pouch (FIGS. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said pouch includes a stiffening element between said first and second ends of said pouch, said stiffening element configured to minimize folding of said one or more layers of nonwoven material during wear of the article (para[0077]: "Slipping it over the penis can be made easier by circular reinforcement lines at the neck of the bag": note "said stiffening element configured to minimize folding of said one or more layers of nonwoven material during wear of the article comprises intended use).
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 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) 2-3, 10, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunger.
Regarding claim 2, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, wherein said pouch includes an absorbent core having [superabsorbent] material (para[0021]: "inside fails coating"), but absorbent to specifically disclose superabsorbent.
In another embodiment Hunger discloses such materials (para[0045]: "material (cellulose wadding, cellulose fluff, special material with high absorbency"). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date to provide the coating with similar material, so as to effectively soak the urine and keep the penis dry). Hunger would appear to still be able to perform normally with the modification and both are disclosed together.
Regarding claim 3, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 2, but fails to describe wherein said absorbent core includes fluff pulp (para[0045]: "cellulose wadding, cellulose fluff"), but fails to describe in an amount not exceeding about 20% by weight of said absorbent core.
Hunger discloses the material as part of a coating (para[0021]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Hunger to have a desired amount of fluff pulp or in this case not exceeding about 20% by weight 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 Hunger would not operate differently with the claimed percentage weight. Further, applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the weight “about” the claimed ranges (specification pp. [0047]).
Regarding claim 10, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 9, wherein said leg portions and said distal portion are formed from a multidirectional elasto[meric] material (para[0025],[0022]: elastic film is considered extensible in all directions), but fails to describe elastomeric. However, polymers are well known materials suitable to make elastic films, and it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date to utilize common elastomers for the elastic film as a matter or simple design choice to improve compatibility and reduce cost.
Regarding claim 16, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, but fails to describe wherein said one or more layers of nonwoven material include a hydrophilic layer and a hydrophobic layer, said hydrophilic and hydrophobic layers in an overlaying relationship with one another.
Hunger describes the one or more layers in an overlaying relationship (elastic film and absorbent coating, para[0022]: "the bag can be made of a thin, elastic waterproof film"; para[0021]: "inside absorbent coating") while remaining silent on the specific materials.
In another embodiment Hunger discloses the absorbent materials (para[0045]: "material (cellulose wadding, cellulose fluff, special material with high absorbency"). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date to provide cellulose as the coating on the instant embodiment (note cellulose is hydrophilic by nature). Hunger would appear to still be able to perform normally with the modification and both are disclosed together.
Lastly, Hunger describes waterproof film, but does not specify the material. However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to utilize any common elastic waterproof films, such as TPU, as a manner of simple design choice, so as to reduce costs and simplify manufacturing (note TPU is hydrophilic).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogin.
Regarding claim 8, Hogin discloses the incontinence article of claim 7, but fails to describe wherein each of said leg portions and said distal portion includes a plurality of elastic strands extending generally along said respective length dimension thereof.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date, through duplication of parts, to include multiple adjacent strap members 20, so as to provide increased holding strength and the ability to distribute the weight versus a single stronger strap).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunger in view of Farrell (US 4620653).
Regarding claim 12, Hunger discloses the incontinence article of claim 5, but fails to describe wherein said proximal portion includes a releasable fold extending in a direction transverse to the longitudinal axis of the article, said fold secured in place by a fastener configured to be selectively disengaged to permit extension of the overall dimension of the article along the longitudinal axis thereof. Hunger discloses a scrotal belt (para[0016]).
Farrell also discloses a holder belt wherein a portion includes a releasable fold extending in a direction transverse to the longitudinal axis of the article, said fold secured in place by a fastener configured to be selectively disengaged to permit extension of the overall dimension of the article along the longitudinal axis thereof (FIG. 6, col 4, In 28-54: "In Fig. 6 the belt 32 is partially shortened by folding over the belt 32 as shown at 76 and attaching loop fastener 68 to hook fastener 64"). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date to provide a velcro and fold design as disclosed by Farrell, so as to allow length adjustability to the belt to better fit users of different sizes.
Claim(s) 14, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramkumar in view of Elias (US 4790835).
Regarding claim 14, Ramkumar discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, further comprising a strap adjacent said first open end and configured for securing said pouch around the penis (see top strap FIGS. 5-6), but fails to describe said strap including a hook-and-loop element adapted to mechanically fasten to an external surface of said pouch or said sling.
Elias describes such a flap (FIGS. 1-3, col 3, In 8-10: "Flap 10 may be secured to extension 8 by snaps, buttons, Velero, etc."). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to replace the top strap of Ramkumar with another such means, such as that disclosed by Elias, as alternate means to secure the condom securely and more discretely.
Regarding claim 19, Ramkumar discloses an incontinence article for a male having a penis and a scrotum and extending along a longitudinal axis (male incontinence device 100 FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9) the article comprising:
a pouch including one or more layers of nonwoven material and configured to envelop the penis (pouch 102, p10, In 4-13, p7, In 16-p8, In 3: "made of a flexible material like natural latex or polyurethane membrane": reasonably assuming non-woven), said pouch having a first open end and a second closed end longitudinally opposed said first open end (FIG. 6, col 5, In 28- col 6, In 8: "the male incontinence device 100 disclosed here comprises a pouch 102 with an open end 102a and a closed end 102b"); and
a sling connected to said pouch adjacent said first open end of said pouch (holding device 104 (comprising 106a) and band 180, FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9: As shown in Figures 6, a band 180 extends from the cylindrical tube 106a"; see also FIGS. 1-2, col 5, In 28- col 6, In 8: "The holding mechanism 104 comprises of two cylindrical tubes 106a and 106b and a tubular sponge 108"), said sling including a loop portion configured to fit around an underside of the scrotum and the penis (see 180, FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9: "the band 180 loops around the scrotum 182"), said loop portion being extensible in at least a generally circumferential direction thereof (FIG. 6: reasonably assuming band is flexible, and therefore extensible in all directions), but fails to describe wherein: said pouch includes a pocket selectively openable to permit removal of the penis therethrough, said pocket having an open condition in which access to an interior of the pouch is permitted and a second condition in which said access is not permitted.
Ramkumar describes the device further comprising a strap adjacent said first open end and configured for securing said pouch around the penis (see top strap FIGS. 5-6).
Elias describes such different type of flap for securing the penis (FIGS. 1-3, col 3, In 8-10: "Flap 10 may be secured to extension 8 by snaps, buttons, Velcro, etc."). It would have been obvious to replace the top strap of Ramkumar with another such means, such as that disclosed by Elias, as alternate means to secure the condom securely and more discretely. Note, as modified Ramkumar provides said pouch includes a pocket selectively openable to permit removal of the penis therethrough, said pocket having an open condition in which access to an interior of the pouch is permitted and a second condition in which said access is not permitted (see how Elias describes a selectively openable pocket/opening through which a penis can be accessed and inserted/removed).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramkumar in view of Nelson (US 2013/0345657).
Regarding claim 18, Ramkumar discloses the incontinence article of claim 1, but fails to describe wherein said loop portion of said sling includes a layer of lotion configured to lower a level of friction between said loop portion and the scrotum during wear.
Nelson discloses skin contact layers of similar devices provided with such materials (para[0100]: "skin care solution may be applied The skin care solution may be absorbed by the lamination layer and then released onto the wearer's skin over a period of time. The skin care solution may be a lotion, gel, or other solution that could provide benefits to the wearer's skin, such as a reduction in irritation or ulcers").
Nelson provides the lotion to benefit the users skin (para[0100]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date to provide such a material so as to reduce irritations and ulcers.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramkumar in view of Elias further in view of Hunger.
Regarding claim 20, Ramkumar discloses an incontinence article for a male having a penis and a scrotum and extending along a longitudinal axis (male incontinence device 100 FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9) the article comprising:
a pouch including one or more layers of nonwoven material and configured to envelop the penis (pouch 102,p10, In 4-13, p7, In 16-p8, In 3: "made of a flexible material like natural latex or polyurethane membrane"), said pouch having a first open end and a second closed end longitudinally opposed said first open end (FIG. 6, p5, In 28- p6, In 8: "the male incontinence device 100 disclosed here comprises a pouch 102 with an open end 102a and a closed end 102b"); and
a sling connected to said pouch adjacent said first open end of said pouch (holding device 104 (comprising 106a) and band 180, FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9: As shown in Figures 6, a band 180 extends from the cylindrical tube 106a"; see also FIGS. 1-2, p5, In 28- p6, In 8: "The holding mechanism 104 comprises of two cylindrical tubes 106a and 106b and a tubular sponge 108"), said sling including a loop portion configured to fit around an underside of the scrotum and the penis (see 180, FIG. 6, p10, In 4-9: "the band 180 loops around the scrotum 182"), said loop portion being extensible in at least a generally circumferential direction thereof (FIG. 6: band is flexible, and therefore extensible in all directions);
a pull tab adjacent said first open end of said pouch and configured for pulling said pouch toward the base of the penis (see unlabeled vertical portion of 106a, FIG. 6: note pulling comprises intended use);
a strap adjacent said first open end and configured for securing said pouch around the penis (see top strap FIGS. 5-6), but fails to describe said strap including a hook-and-loop element adapted to mechanically fasten to an external surface of said pouch or said sling.
Elias describes such a flap (FIGS. 1-3, col 3, In 8-10: "Flap 10 may be secured to extension 8 by snaps, buttons, Velero, etc."). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to replace the top strap of Ramkumar with another such means, such as that disclosed by Elias, as alternate means to secure the condom securely and more discretely.
Ramkumar in view of Elias fails to describe wherein said one or more layers of nonwoven material include a hydrophilic layer and a hydrophobic layer, said hydrophilic and hydrophobic layers in an overlaying relationship with one another, wherein said pouch includes a stiffening element between said first and second ends of said pouch, said stiffening element configured to minimize folding of said one or more layers of nonwoven material during wear of the article.
Hunger describes the one or more layers in an overlaying relationship (elastic film and absorbent coating, para[0022]: "the bag can be made of a thin, elastic waterproof film"; para[0021]: "inside absorbent coating") while remaining silent on the specific materials, wherein said pouch includes a stiffening element between said first and second ends of said pouch, said stiffening element configured to minimize folding of said one or more layers of nonwoven material during wear of the article (para[0077]: "Slipping it over the penis can be made easier by circular reinforcement lines at the neck of the bag": note "said stiffening element configured to minimize folding of said one or more layers of nonwoven material during wear of the article comprises intended use).
In another embodiment Hunger discloses the absorbent materials (para[0045]: "material (cellulose wadding, cellulose fluff, special material with high absorbency"). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date to provide cellulose as the coating on the instant embodiment (note cellulose is hydrophilic by nature). Hunger would appear to still be able to perform normally with the modification and both are disclosed together.
Lastly, Hunger describes waterproof film, but does not specify the material. However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to utilize any common elastic waterproof films, such as TPU, as a manner of simple design choice, so as to reduce costs and simplify manufacturing (note TPU is hydrophilic).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAI H WENG whose telephone number is (571)272-5852. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, 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.
/KAI H WENG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781