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 § 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.
Claims 16-21 and 24-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strack et al (US5681645) in view of Strack et al (EP0452727) and Tomoi et al (EP 3960025).
Strack ‘645 is directed to a laminate material having stretchability and recovery, breathability and barrier properties, and being made from a nonwoven elastomeric web having at least one web of textile material discontinuously adhesively bonded to each side thereof. The nonwoven elastomeric web is preferably a web of meltblown elastomeric fibers and the other webs may be knits, wovens or scrim materials. These laminates are well suited for infection control products, personal care products and garments (ABST).
Strack ‘645 teaches the foregoing objects are achieved by the present invention, which is constituted by a laminate of (1) a first web of a knit, woven or scrim material, (2) a second web of nonwoven elastomeric material, and (3) a third web of a knit, woven or scrim material, discontinuously adhesively bonded together. The webs, when the nonwoven elastomeric web is in an unstretched state, are flat (that is, the first web is non-gathered or non-puckered). The laminate material has stretchability and recovery, breathability and barrier properties. The laminate material is free of an elastomeric film and the nonwoven elastomeric web provides recovery to the laminate (col. 2, lines 5-20).
Strack ‘645 teaches the nonwoven elastomeric material is preferably a meltblown material. The fibers in the nonwoven elastomeric web illustratively range from 0.5 to 100 microns in diameter which overlaps the claimed range of 20-60 micron. The nonwoven provides barrier properties in the finished laminate, e.g., increased opacity and/or insulation and/or dirt protection and/or liquid repellency, are enhanced by the use of finer fibers, in the 0.5-20 micron range (col. 8, lines 1-7).
Strack ‘645 teaches the nonwoven is made from elastomers such as polyurethanes (col. 6, lines 22-36).
Strack ‘645 teaches the nonwoven can be laminated to the woven or scrim material using an adhesive (col. 9, lines 35-40). The adhesive is equated with Adhesive A.
Strack ‘645 teaches a woven and scrims have more dimensional stability than knits, especially in machine and cross direction, power recovery is added to these material to the extent that they stretch (col. 9, lines 24-34). Strack teaches a woven or scrim that has stretch and recovery in the machine or cross direction.
Strack ‘645 teaches the properties of liquid barrier properties and hydrohead (col. 4, lines 27) which is equated with water repellent as claimed.
Strack ‘645 teaches the basis weight of the nonwoven can be 6.8 to 204 gsm, 10.2 to 102 gsm (col. 8, lines 35-40).
Strack ‘645 does not explicitly teach the woven has stretchability in at least a warp direction or weft direction.
Strack ‘727 is directed to a laminate having stretch and recovery process for forming and use of same (Title). Laminate materials (6) are constituted by at least a textile web (1) (a web of knitted, woven or scrim material) and a nonwoven elastomeric web (2) preferably a web of meltblown elastomeric fibers, bonded together. Bonding is performed with the elastomeric web (2) in an unstretched or only partially stretched state, so that the textile web is flat (non-gathered) when the elastomeric web is in its unstretched state. The laminate material (6) has recovery and barrier (opacity, insulation, wind resistance, etc.) properties, while retaining breathability, due to the nonwoven elastomeric web. The laminate material can be used for wearing apparel and fitted pads (table pads, mattress pad, etc.). Also disclosed are methods of forming the laminate materials and special uses of same (ABST).
Strack ‘727 teaches the nonwoven material can be based on a fiber such as spandex and blending spandex with the polyamide fibers [0023].
Strack ‘727 teaches the nonwoven can be laminated to a stretch recoverable fabric such as a woven that is formed of spandex [0022].
Strack ‘727 teaches the laminate of the nonwoven and the stretch recoverable fabric (woven) can be bonded with adhesives and stretchable adhesives, such as hot melt adhesives that can be applied intermittently without substantially reducing the stretch recovery [0022].
Strack ‘727 teaches a nonwoven made from polyurethane fibers adhesively bonded to a scrim, woven cloth that has stretchability in both the cross and machine direction which is equated with the warp and weft [0027].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide a scrim or woven with stretchability in the warp and/or weft direction motivated to provide a laminate with stretch and recovery properties.
Strack ‘645 differs and does not teach the bulkiness and thickness of the nonwoven.
Tomoi is directed to a fiber layered body with excellent integrated structure including: an extra-fine fiber layer containing thermoplastic elastomeric fibers; and a non-extra-fine fiber layer. The fiber layered body includes: an extra-fine fiber layer which comprises thermoplastic elastomeric fibers and has an average fiber diameter of less than 10 micron; and a non-extra-fine fiber layer containing fibers having an average fiber diameter of 10 to 30 micron and adjacent to the extra-fine fiber layer. The fiber layered body has a peeling strength between the extra-fine fiber layer and the non-extra-fine fiber layer of 0.40 N/5cm or higher, and has an surface unevenness relative to a thickness of the fiber layered body of 40% or less (ABST).
Tomoi teaches that (i) where an extra-fine fiber layer comprising thermoplastic elastomeric fibers is layered with a non-extra-fine fiber layer, the elastomeric feature of the thermoplastic elastomer fibers makes it difficult to integrate the extra-fine fiber layer with the non-extra-fine fiber layer. In order to improve this problem, the inventors has further found that (ii) peeling strength between the extra-fine fiber layer comprising thermoplastic elastomeric fibers and the non-extra-fine fiber layer can be improved both by making a part of the fibers constituting the extra-fine fiber layer to enter into the non-extra-fine fiber layer at the time of bonding the extra-fine fiber layer with the non-extra-fine fiber layer, and by making the fibers constituting the extra-fine fiber layer to be substantially melted in contact to the interface with the non-extra-fine fiber layer. Moreover, the inventors further has found that (iii) a fiber layered body with such peeling strength between layers can achieve an integrated structure as a fiber layered body without embossing that causes deep surface unevenness for integrated structure; and further can have an improved adhesion to skin due to flat surface unevenness. In the light of the above findings, the inventors have achieved the present invention [0007].
Tomoie present invention encompasses the following preferred aspects in [0008].
[1] A fiber layered body comprising: an extra-fine fiber layer which comprises thermoplastic elastomeric fibers and has an average fiber diameter of less than 10 micron; and a non-extra-fine fiber layer which comprises fibers having an average fiber diameter of 10 to 30 micron and is adjacent to the extra-fine fiber layer; and the fiber layered body having: a peeling strength between the extra-fine fiber layer and the non-extra-fine fiber layer of 0.40 N/5cm or higher (preferably 0.50 N/5cm or higher), and a surface unevenness relative to a thickness of the fiber layered body of 40% or less.
[2] The fiber layered body according to the aspect [1], wherein the thermoplastic elastomeric fibers are polyurethane-based elastomeric fibers or polystyrene-based elastomeric fibers.
[3] The fiber layered body according to the aspect [1] or [2], wherein the extra-fine fiber layer has a basis weight of 50 g/m.sup.2 or less (preferably 20 g/m.sup.2 or less, more preferably 3 to 20 g/m.sup.2, even more preferably 5 to 20 g/m.sup.2).
[4] The fiber layered body according to any one of the aspects [1] to [3], wherein the non-extra-fine fiber layer contains hydrophilic fibers and hydrophobic fibers.
[5] The fiber layered body according to any one of the aspects [1] to [4], wherein the extra-fine fiber layer is a meltblown nonwoven fabric, and the non-extra-fine fiber layer is a spunlaced nonwoven fabric.
The thickness of the extra-fine fiber layer can be selected from a range of 10 to 500 micron, for example, 30 to 500 micron preferably 30 to 200 micron and even more preferably 35 to 150 micron (especially 40 to 100 micron). If the thickness is too small, the amount of fibers to form an extra-fine fiber layer tends to be insufficient, making it difficult to form a uniform extra-fine fiber layer on the skin surface. On the other hand, too large thickness may lead to difficulty in permeation of liquid components into the extra-fine fiber layer from the non-extra-fine fiber layer [0048].
Tomoi teaches from the viewpoint of ensuring the release of the liquid component as well as improving the elasticity (in particular, stretchability and adherence to the skin), the density of the extra-fine fiber layer can be selected from a range of about 0.10 to 0.40 g/cm3. A density of 0.40 g/cm3 is equivalent to bulk or specific volume of 2.5 cm3/g [0049].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ a polyurethane extra-fine fiber layer with the claimed thickness and density motivated to achieve the properties of elasticity and coverage.
As to claim 17, Strack ‘645 does not measure the elongation rate.
Strack ‘025 teaches the fiber layered body has a recovery ratio after 25% elongation of 60% or higher [0008]. Strack ‘025 teaches 25% elongation which is greater than 5% as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine an elastomeric nonwoven and stretch woven motivated to produce a laminate with stretch and recovery properties.
As to claims 18 and 26, Strack ‘645 teaches a three-web laminate (col. 2, lines 23-25), (col. 6, lines 15-22) wherein the outer webs are woven or scrim webs. The webs are bonded via adhesive and therefore an adhesive B.
Strack ‘727 teaches a nonwoven made from polyurethane fibers adhesively bonded to a scrim, woven cloth that has stretchability in both the cross and machine direction which is equated with the warp and weft [0027].
As to claim 19 and 27, Strack ‘645 teaches an adhesive to bond the layers. The adhesives can be aqueous adhesives, solvent based adhesives. The adhesive does not interfere with the elasticity and is discontinuous across the laminate, and can be applied by rotogravure, dot gravure, flexographic or meltblowing (col. 9, lines 35-62) and (col. 10, lines 38-53). As the adhesive can be applied as a liquid or thermoplastic, it is reasonable to presume that it infiltrates the nonwoven fabric.
Strack ‘645 and Strack ‘727 differs and does not disclose the infiltration and peel strength.
Tomoi teaches a peeling strength of 0.4 N/5cm which is 0.05 N/cm and 5 cN/cm and in the claimed range. Tomoi teaches the peeling strength is improved by making the fibers of the extra-fine fiber layer to enter into the non-extra fine fiber layer.
As Tomoi teaches the claimed peel strength and the extra-fine layer enters the non-extra fine layer in order to achieve the peel strength and Strack teaches a meltblown fiber can be the adhesive, the combination of Strack ‘645, Strack ‘727 and Tomoi reasonably teaches the adhesive enters the non-extra-fine layer in a discrete amount such as 10% as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ an adhesive that infiltrates the nonwoven 10-90% motivated to increase the peel strength of the bond between the layers.
As to claim 20, Strack teaches the hydrohead of the material is greater than 33 centimeter (col. 12, table 1) as measured by the Federal Test standard 191A, method 5514 (col. 4, lines 28-34). Strack does not measure the hydrohead via the claimed JIS method. As Strack teaches the same materials and structure as claimed, it is reasonable to presume the properties is inherent to Strack. When the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention the examiner has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112- 2112.02
As to claims 21 and 25, Strack teaches the laminate has a Frazier porosity measure of breathability as measured by Federal Test Standard No. 191A (col. 4, lines 36-42) to be 57 ft3/min/ft2 (col. 12, table 1) Strack does not measure the breathability JIS method as claimed. As Strack teaches the same materials and structure as claimed, it is reasonable to presume the properties is inherent to Strack. When the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention the examiner has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112- 2112.02
As to claim 24, Strack ‘645 and Strack ‘727 differ and do not teach the thickness of the laminate.
Tomoi teaches the thickness of the non-extra-fine fiber layer can be 100-3000 micron preferably 400-1200 micron [0035] and the extra fine fiber layer is 30-500 micron, 40-100 micron [0048]. The combination is 130-3500 which is 0.15 to 3.5 mm which overlaps the claimed range of 0.30 mm or less.
Tomoi teaches the non-extra-fine fiber layer thickness is to provide strength and extra-fine fiber layer thickness is selected to improve the elasticity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to produce a laminate with the claimed thickness motivated to achieve strength and elasticity.
Claims 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strack et al (US5681645) in view of Strack et al (EP0452727) and Tomoi et al (EP 3960025) and in further view of Dutta et al (US 5529830).
As to claim 23, Strack ‘645 teaches the adhesive is applied discontinuously by rotogravure, dot gravure which would be a dotted pattern.
Dutta is directed to a two way stretchable laminate which is air permeable and waterproof while being permeable to water vapor. The stretchable layered fabric has stretch and recovery properties (ABST).
Dutta teaches it is important that the minimal amount of adhesive 3 be used in bonding the composite layer 5 to the elastic fabric 4. Adhesive can be applied to the composite layer or the elastic fabric such that it covers less than about 70%, more preferably less than about 50% and most preferably less than about 40% of the surface of the composite layer on the fabric. It is preferred that the adhesive be applied to the composite layer. The adhesive coverage can be adjusted over the indicated range to provide a stretchable laminate with specific performance requirements for a given application (col. 11, lines 53-65).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide a patterned adhesive with a surface application of 70% of less motivated to provide for elasticity and breathability in the laminate.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strack et al (US5681645) in view of Strack et al (EP0452727) and Tomoi et al (EP 3960025) and in further view of Morii et al (JP 2015017341)
As to claim 22, Strack ‘645, Strack ‘727 and Tomoi differ and do not teach the cover factor of the woven fabric.
Morii is directed to a fabric that has extensibility, resiliency and elongation recoverability, although containing no elastic yarn in the fabric (ABST). Morii teaches a woven structure includes a three-layer structure and the number of layers of the woven, knitting or nonwoven fabric may be single layer or two or more layers (page 4, para 5).
When the fabric is a woven fabric, the cover factor (CF) of the woven fabric is preferably 1000 to 2500. More preferably, it is 1200-2100. When the CF is less than the above range, the kickback property and the stretch recovery property are likely to be lowered. Moreover, if it exceeds the above range, the extensibility tends to be lowered. In the present invention, the cover factor (CF) of the woven fabric is calculated by CF = √warp fineness dtex × warp density + √weft fineness dtex × weft density (page 4, para 6).
The single yarn fineness, total fineness and number of filaments of the ifber used in the fabric is not particularly limited, but the single yarn fineness is preferably 0.1 to 5 dtex or less. The total fineness is 10 to 500 dtex, preferably 30-200 dtex. If the total fineness is less than the range, the fabric becomes too thin, the stretch recovery property is lowered and cracking easily occurs. When the range is exceeded, the cloth becomes too thick and heavy and wearing comfort is low (page 5, para 7).
Morii teaches the fabric is treated to be water repellent (page 6, para 7).
Morii teaches an elastic woven fabric that has a cover factor that overlaps the claimed range and a yarn dtex that overlaps the claimed range. Morii teaches by using the cover factor in the claimed range, it provides for the desired stretch recovery property. When using the claimed dtex that fabric is a range of not too thin to lower stretch recovery and not too thick for wearing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ an elastic woven fabric with the claimed cover factor and dtex motivated to produce a fabric with the desired stretch recovery properties and weight of the fabric for wearing.
Claims 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strack et al (US5681645) in view of Strack et al (EP0452727) and Tomoi et al (EP 3960025) and in further view of Sato et al (US4539255).
As to claim 28, Strack ‘645 and Strack teaches the laminate is free of an elastomeric film or resin layer.
Tomoi teaches the fiber layer can include additional layers including a film layer [0012]. Tomoi provides no motivation to include a film.
Sato is directed to a moisture-permeable waterproof fabric that comprises a polyurethane film having a thickness of 2 to 20 microns. The film can be applied in the state of non-porous film and a waterproof fabric with a sufficient water resistance (col. 2, lines 29-38).
With regard to claims 29 and 30, Strack ‘645 and Strack ‘727 and Tomoi teaches the fiber laminated structure as noted under the rejection of claim 16. The layers are bonded together with adhesive and then adding the water resistant film of Sato, the laminate is subjected to a water repellent finishing as claimed.
As to claims 28-30, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ a film or resin layer motivated to produce a waterproof laminate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Murahara et al (US 20160289890)
Tanaka et al (US 20050118394)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A STEELE whose telephone number is (571)272-7115. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/JENNIFER A STEELE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789