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 .
Applicant’s amendment and accompanying remarks filed June 12, 2026 are acknowledged.
Examiner acknowledges amended claims 1 and 9.
Examiner acknowledges cancelled claims 5 and 14.
The rejection of claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-13 and 15-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C (pre-AIA ), second paragraph is overcome by Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 9-13 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haxby et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2020/0002884 in view of Intscher-Owrang et al., U.S. Patent Pre Grant Publication 2022/0072806 is withdrawn due to Applicant’s argument.
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 6 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.
Claim 6 is rendered indefinite because of the term "type" (e.g. natural or synthetic fibers). The addition of the term "type" to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the express so as to render it indefinite. For purposes of examination, Examiner is interpreting the claim to refer to a third region comprised of a third formula, wherein the third formula is comprised of at least one of natural or synthetic fibers. See MPEP 2173.05(b). The claim set filed recites claim 6 as (Currently Amended) however the submitted claim does not indicate that the term “type” is deleted or that the claim has been amended.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as being anticipated by Haxby et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 20200002884.
Regarding claims 1-2 and 4, Haxby discloses a medical support surface cover/mattress cover [soft good]. The abstract of Haxby discloses a textile layer coated with a polymeric composition forming first and second regions [0049]. Paragraph 0012 discloses a polymer layer comprising adjoining first and second regions that have different physical or visual properties wherein the first and second regions being in a side-by-side arrangement wherein the first region being formed from a first polymer composition and the second region being formed from a second polymer composition. It is disclosed in paragraph 0014 that the polymer layer is a single layer. Paragraph 0015 discloses the presence of multiple regions having different physical characteristics within a single sheet of fabric. It is disclosed in paragraph 0043 that the polymer(s) comprised within the first and second polymer compositions may be different providing that the first and second regions differ in at least one physical and /or visual property. Paragraph 0044 discloses that the polymer composition can include thermoplastic polymers. Paragraph 0058 discloses an interlayer. Examiner is corresponding the interlayer as Applicant's intermingling region. Paragraph 0053 discloses mingling/merging of the different polymer compositions at the interface. Paragraph 0064 discloses that different polymers may be used in all of the different polymer compositions. Also, paragraph 0064 discloses that the interlayer may be the same as the polymer compositions present in both the first and second regions. Paragraph 0004 of Haxby discloses that polymer-coated textiles can be used for outdoor apparel and protective clothing [3-D]. Paragraph 0018 discloses a sheet of textile fabric wherein the textile fabric may be formed from natural or synthetic fibers. Also, paragraph 0018 discloses that the textile layer can be nonwoven. Paragraph 0015 discloses the presences of multiple regions having different physical characteristics within a single sheet of fabric.
Regarding claims 6-7, paragraph 0035 discloses a third region. Paragraph 0040 discloses that the third region may have the same physical and visual properties as either the first or second regions or may have different physical and/or properties than the first or second regions. Paragraph 0018 discloses a sheet of textile fabric wherein the textile fabric may be formed from natural or synthetic fibers. Also, paragraph 0018 discloses that the textile layer can be nonwoven. Paragraph 0044 discloses that the polymer composition can include thermoplastic polymers.
Regarding claim 8, paragraph 0040 of Haxby discloses that the third region may have different physical and/or visual properties from those of the first and second regions.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haxby et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 20200002884.
Haxby, above, remains relied upon for claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Haxby is silent to the first region being comprised of a different percentage of at least one colorant than the second region. Haxby does disclose in paragraph 0038 that visual properties can include color. Paragraph 0047 discloses the inclusion of an additive such as pigments to alter the color of a region. Reference claim 9 discloses that the first and second region differ in color [visual property]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the first region being comprised of a different percentage of at least one pigment than the second region to ensure that first and second region differ in color.
Claims 9-13 and 15-16 are allowed. Applicant claims a method of forming a soft good article as recited in claim 9. The closest prior art, Haxby et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2020000288, as disclosed above. Haxby fails to teach or suggest that the first and second formulas are mixed aqueous fibrous slurries. Haxby fails to teach or suggest the method as recited in claim 9.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 12, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the textile layer and the polymer layer are formed separately and that the textile layer and the polymer layer are not a unitary non-woven material. Haxby discloses a final product which is a polymer coated fabric wherein the fabric can include a non-woven fabric. The polymer coated fabric is a unitary structure. The manner in which the polymer coated fabric is manufactured does not make it a different product. Whether made separately, the polymer coated fabric of Haxby is the final product and is a unitary structure.
Additionally, Applicant argues that the textile layer does not include two regions with different characteristics. With the polymeric material being coated onto the fabric, the combination of the polymer and fabric is a unitary structure. The polymeric material with different characteristic is incorporated into the textile making it a unitary structure.
Also, Applicant argues that Haxby reference lacks at least one of wherein the first formula is comprised of at least one of-natural or synthetic fibers and at least one of crosslinkers, natural and/or synthetic adhesives, biobased and/or synthetic thermoplastics, including nanocellulose, and/or latex; wherein the second formula is comprised of at least one of natural or synthetic fibers and at least one of crosslinkers, natural and/or synthetic adhesives, biobased and/or synthetic thermoplastics, including nanocellulose, and/or latex. Paragraph 0064 of Haxby discloses that different polymers may be used in the different polymer compositions. Also, paragraph 0068 discloses two or more different polymer compositions. Paragraph 0086 of Haxby discloses regions formed different polymer compositions. The polymer having the different polymeric compositions having different physical and visual characteristics coated onto the nonwoven forms a unitary shaped good as claimed.
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMIE S THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1530. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Jennifer Boyd, can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/CAMIE S THOMPSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights