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 .
Objections to the Drawings
1. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show other than on page 4 the sweeping cloth 5; cleaning layer 6; the core layer (7); and the scratch strip (8) are not provided with reference numerals in subsequent mentions in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Rejections 35 U.S.C. §112
2.
(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.
Claims 1-10 are 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.
Independent claim 1 as amended requires cleaning layer, core layer and starch strip having different fibers but the specification as amended on page 4 recites the sweeping cloth 5; cleaning layer 6; the core layer (7); and the scratch strip (8) but are not provided with reference numerals in subsequent mentions in the specification. It is not clear whether the cleaning layer, core layer and scratch strip mentioned on page 4 are all the same elements throughout the entirety of the specification or the subsequent mentions of these elements different from the previous ones. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date would not be able to ascertain what would constitute the cleaning layer from the core layer since such has not been delineated consistently throughout the specification.
Rejections 35 U.S.C. §103
3. 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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent (8,250,700) to Pung et al. (cited by Applicant) in view of U.S. Patent Publication (2008/0220703) to Jung.
Regarding independent claim 1, Pung et al. teaches most of the elements of claim 1 including at least a cleaning layer (polymer) and a core layer (thermoplastic) (See Col. 6 lines 5-25 of Pung et al.), with both the cleaning layer (polymer) and the core layer (thermoplastic) contain cellulose and consist entirely of natural fibers and/or regenerated fibers (See Col. 4 lines 1-15 of Pung et al.),
a scratch strip (4) having increased abrasive properties compared to the remaining cleaning layer is arranged on or in the cleaning layer (See Col. 16 lines 10-20 of Pung et al.). Except, Pung et al. is silent regarding that the scratch strip (4) contains hemp and also consists entirely of natural fibers and/or regenerated fibers (See Col. 12 lines 1-12 of Pung et al.) with the natural fibers and/or regenerated fibers contained in the cleaning layer, in the core layer and in the scratch strip are selected independently of one another from the group including or consisting of viscose fibers, modal fibers, lyocell fibers, cellulose fibers, cupro fibers, cotton fibers, jute fibers, hemp fibers and flax fibers as well as any mixtures thereof. However, Jung teaches an abrasive backing for a cloth or yarn (70). Jung teaches that hemp along with cotton and other materials are useful in woven layers together for a constituent fabric (See paragraph [0022] of Pung et al.). Additionally, Jung teaches other materials like jute and other fibers may be used to make the fabric (See paragraph [0034] of Pung et al.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date to modify Pung et al. with Jung to include a hemp along with natural fibers in order to hold layers together for the cleaning implement taught in Pung et al.
Regarding claim 2, Pung et al. as modified with Jung by a cover layer (3) which also consists entirely of natural fibers and/or regenerated fibers and is arranged on the side of the core layer (thermoplastic) facing away from the cleaning layer cleaning layer (polymer) (See Col. 16 lines 1-10 of Pung et al.).
Regarding claim 5, Pung et al. as modified with Jung teaches that the core layer consists of 100 % cellulose (See Col. 4 lines 1-15 of Pung et al.) .
Regarding claim 8, Pung et al. teaches providing a at least a cleaning layer (polymer) and a core layer (thermoplastic) (See Col. 6 lines 5-25 of Pung et al.), with both the cleaning layer (polymer) and the core layer (thermoplastic) contain cellulose and consist entirely of natural fibers and/or regenerated fibers (See Col. 4 lines 1-15 of Pung et al.),
a scratch strip (4) having increased abrasive properties compared to the remaining cleaning layer is arranged on or in the cleaning layer (See Col. 16 lines 10-20 of Pung et al.). Except, Pung et al. is silent regarding that the scratch strip (4) contains hemp and also consists entirely of natural fibers and/or regenerated fibers (See Col. 12l ins 1-12 of Pung et al.) and with the natural fibers and/or regenerated fibers contained in the cleaning layer, in the core layer and in the scratch strip are selected independently of one another from the group including or consisting of viscose fibers, modal fibers, lyocell fibers, cellulose fibers, cupro fibers, cotton fibers, jute fibers, hemp fibers and flax fibers as well as any mixtures thereof. However, Jung teaches an abrasive backing for a cloth or yarn (70). Jung teaches that hemp along with cotton and other materials are useful in woven layers together for a constituent fabric (See paragraph [0022] of Pung et al.). Additionally, Jung teaches other materials like jute and other fibers may be used to make the fabric (See paragraph [0034] of Pung et al.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date to modify Pung et al. with Jung to include a hemp along with natural fibers in order to hold layers together for the cleaning implement taught in Pung et al. and connecting the cleaning layer (polymer) to the core layer (thermoplastic).
Regarding claim 9, Pung et al. as modified with Jung teaches that cleaning layer (polymer) and the core layer (thermoplastic) are connected to one another by treatment by means of electric shocks, by hydroentanglement, by needlepunching and/or by micro-entangling via ultrasonically generated movements of the fibers contained in the respective layers (See paragraph [0022] of Pung et al.).
Regarding claim 10, Pung et al. as modified with Jung teaches a head part (1) movably arranged on a handle (11), to which the multi-ply disposable floor sweeping cloth according to claim 1 is attached, so that the cleaning layer (polymer) is in contact with the floor when the floor is wiped and the scratch strip is not in contact with the floor when the floor is wiped (See Col. 12 lines 56-62 of Pung et al.).
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed on May 19, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant’s amendment to the specification and claim 1 have not overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §112. The Applicant’s amendment to independent claim 1 and claim 8 have been considered. The rejection of obviousness with respect to U.S. Patent (8,250,700) to Pung et al. (cited by Applicant) in view of U.S. Patent Publication (2008/0220703) to Jung is maintained. Specifically, the amendment to claim 1 does not overcome this rejection since Jung ). Jung teaches that hemp along with cotton and other materials are useful in woven layers together for a constituent fabric (See paragraph [0022] of Pung et al.). Additionally, Jung teaches other materials like jute and other fibers may be used to make the fabric (See paragraph [0034] of Pung et al.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date to modify Pung et al. with Jung to include a hemp along with natural fibers in order to hold layers together for the cleaning implement taught in Pung et al. and connecting the cleaning layer (polymer) to the core layer (thermoplastic).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D. JENNINGS whose telephone number is (571)270-1536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30pm. 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, Monica S. Carter can be reached at (571) 272-4475. 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.
MICHAEL DEANGILO. JENNINGS
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/MICHAEL D JENNINGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights