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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-12 and 16-20 in the reply filed on April 8, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-15 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 5 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 5 recites the limitation "the components of the bicomponent fiber" in the line: "The method of claim 1, wherein the components of the bicomponent fiber are all polypropylene.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purposes of compact prosecution, the examiner will consider that there is an antecedent feature of a bicomponent fiber in claim 1.
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.
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) 1-12 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansen (WO 2020/187540 A1) IDS 03/01/2024 in view of Westwood (WO 2010/039583 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hansen discloses a method for making a multilayer nonwoven sheet (abs, p. 9 1st paragraph) that is elastically stretchable in machine direction (p. 17 4th paragraph ability of the inventive material to be stretched/ in both cross and machine direction is unique; pp. 4-5 last paragraph-1st paragraph elongation values of beyond 100%), the method comprising:
providing an elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet comprising at least two layers of nonwoven materials (abs), wherein one layer is an elastically stretchable nonwoven comprising spunbonded elastic fibers formed from a thermoplastic elastomer polymer material (abs), and wherein one layer is a stretchable facing layer comprising spunbonded crimped multicomponent fibers (p. 2 5th paragraph);
However, while Hansen mention that uncrimped and inelastic spunbonded webs have a relatively low extensibility in the machine direction (p. 12 1st paragraph), Hansen does not disclose providing a low elongation nonwoven sheet having a lower elongation at break at least in cross-machine direction when compared to the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet; and co-feeding the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet and the low elongation nonwoven sheet to a bonding station where the sheets are joined by melt-bonding.
Westwood discloses a process for forming a multilayer elastic meltblown fabric and that is spunbonded with adhering the at least one elastic meltblown fabric to at least one extensible fabric (abs). This can be a low elongation nonwoven sheet having a lower elongation at break at least in cross-machine direction when compared to the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet (paragraph [0066] where the elastic meltblown fabric that has no orientation possesses an MD elongation from less than 20% or less compared to the elastic stretchable nonwoven sheet); and
and co-feeding the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet and the low elongation nonwoven sheet to a bonding station where the sheets are joined by melt-bonding in pre- defined patterns (paragraphs [0057] [0058] elastic meltblown fabric is formed directly upon one or more extensible fabric including spunbonded fabrics where the elastic meltblown fabric is collected through a patterned/embossed calender roll),
wherein, in one option, as recited by claim 1, the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet is fed to the bonding station under a pre-tension of the low elongation sheet that leads to a machine-directional pre- stretch that is less than the machine-directional pre-stretch of the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet (paragraphs [0066] [0098] claim 10 claim 23, where in some embodiments no additional mechanical orientation or stretching is performed and results in less MD elongation than with pre-stretching).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the disclosure of Hansen with the teachings of Westwood whereby a method for making a multilayer nonwoven sheet by providing an elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet comprising at least two layers of nonwoven material which are elastically stretchable, as disclosed by Hansen, to include the co-feeding of a low elongation nonwoven sheet to be bonded and joined by melt-bonding to an elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet under a pre-tension for the elastically stretchable sheet with less or no pre-tension for a designated low elongation sheet, as taught or suggested by Westwood.
The skilled artisan would be motivated to use this combination because combining an elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet joined with a low elongation nonwoven sheet can improve the performance of a multilayer nonwoven sheet that is elastically stretchable providing an elongation from greater than 200% - 1000% (paragraph [0063]).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen further discloses that the degree of machine-directional pre-stretch of the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet is such that the sheet is pre- stretched by 40-160 %, of its original dimension (p. 23 2nd paragraph Table 4 where a test sheet is stretched to 100% extension).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen/Westwood further disclose that the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet and the low elongation nonwoven sheet that are co-fed to the bonding station are both pre-bonded (Hansen, p. 8 3rd paragraph mild pre-compaction step is used during manufacture to additionally promote adhesion; Westwood paragraph [0062] fabrics may be passed between unheated or heated smooth rolls while applying light pressure thereon),
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Westwood further discloses that the low elongation nonwoven sheet is a spunbonded sheet (paragraph [0058] the elastic meltblown fabric is formed directly upon one or more extensible fabrics such as spunbond fabrics).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen further discloses that the components of the bicomponent fiber are all polypropylene (p. 3 5th (last) paragraph first and second components of the crimped multicomponent fibers preferably bicomponent fibers where these are generally polyolefins like polypropylene).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen further discloses that the components of the crimped multicomponent fibers is a propylene-a-olefin copolymer material (co-PP), and at least another component of the crimped multicomponent fibers is a polypropylene homopolymer (PP) (p. 3 5th (last) paragraph – p. 4 1st paragraph co-PP and PP).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen further discloses that the elastic fibers of the elastically stretchable layer comprise a thermoplastic polyolefin elastomer (TPE-o) (p. 7 3rd paragraph elastic fibers of the elastic layer is a thermoplastic polyolefin elastomer material (TPE-o)).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen further discloses the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet comprises at least one facing layer on either side of the elastic layer. (Fig. 1 p 15 3rd paragraph p. 20 2nd paragraph an elastic layer is formed by depositing elastic polymer fibers on top of the web 110 while another prefabricated nonwoven web – 120 is concurrently unrolled from second feed roll – 40 and laid on top of the freshly formed elastic layer – 13; facing layers – 110 and 120 on either side of the elastic layer – 130).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Westwood further disclose wherein the elastic layer of the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet is exposed on the side that faces the low elongation nonwoven sheet, and after joining the sheets in the bonding stations lies directly adjacent the low elongation nonwoven sheet (paragraph [0066] where annealing (bonding) is combined with mechanical orientation in either machine or cross directions (MD & CD) and where some sheets have additional mechanical orientation or stretching and in other embodiments there a is a low degree of or no orientation).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Westwood further discloses the pre-stretch of the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet is adjusted by using nip-rolls to adjust its translation speed (paragraph [0062] polyolefin polymer-coated fabric(s) may be passed through a nip between unheated or heated smooth roll while applying light pressure to form an extensible construction).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Westwood further discloses the bonding station comprises at least one calender roll having embossing projections on the surface, which are heated or ultrasonically vibrated (paragraphs [0057] [0067] calender roll may have an embossed drum; elastic meltblown fabrics are annealed in a single-step by a heated roll during calendaring).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen further discloses that the bonding station comprises a pair of interacting rolls whose surfaces comprise interlocking cross- directional ribs and grooves, and embossing projections arranged along the crests of the ribs and/or grooves on at least one of the rolls (p. 11 2nd & 3rd paragraphs a pair of interacting rolls whose surface comprise interlocking annular grooves and crests; microscopic fiber configuration that are in the form of parallel stripes oriented in cross-machine direction of the sheet.).
Regarding Claims 16 and 17, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen further discloses that the degree of machine-directional pre-stretch of the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet is such that the sheet is pre-stretched by 60- 140% of its original dimension or that the degree of machine-directional pre-stretch of the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet is such that the sheet is pre-stretched by 80- 120% of its original dimension (p. 23 2nd paragraph sheet(s) stretched to 200% (corresponding to 100% extension).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen/Westwood further discloses that the elastically stretchable nonwoven sheet and the low elongation nonwoven sheet that are co-fed to the bonding station are both pre-bonded by a pattern of melt-bonding points (Fig.1 Hansen. p. 14 bottom paragraph where both carrier layers – 110 and 120 are spunbonded nonwoven webs formed from crimped multicomponent fiber and the carrier layer – 11 has a regular pattern of calender bonding points; Westwood. Paragraph [0066] where the low elongation nonwoven sheet can be an elastic meltblown fabric with a low degree of, or no, orientation).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen discloses that the low elongation nonwoven sheet is a spunbonded sheet formed from uncrimped monocomponent fibers (Hansen p. 12 1st paragraph, p. 4 3rd paragraph regular uncrimped and inelastic spunbonded webs have a relatively low extensibility where the uncrimped fibers are monocomponent).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Hansen and Westwood disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Hansen discloses that one of the components of the crimped multicomponent fibers is a poly(propylene-ethylene) copolymer and at least another component of the crimped multicomponent fibers is a polypropylene homopolymer (PP) (Fig. 2 p. 18 last paragraph, where crimped biocomponent fibers included a commercially available polypropylene-ethylene copolymer with a relatively broad polydispersity and a commercially available polypropylene material with a relatively narrow polydispersity).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE K. SWIER whose telephone number is (571)272-4598. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 8:30 am - 5:30 pm PST.
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.
/WAYNE K. SWIER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/Abbas Rashid/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights