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 .
Response to Amendment
An amendment was filed on 08/10/2026. Claims 1, 9-11, 13-15, and 22 have been amended, new claims 28-29 have been added, and claim 16 has been canceled. Currently, claims 1-15 and 17-29 are pending, with claims 10 and 14, and 18 being withdrawn from consideration as explained further below, and claims 1-9, 11-13, 15, 17, and 19-29 are being examined on the merits.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of
Group A, subspecies II encompassing claims 1-15, 17, and 19-27
Group B, subspecies II, encompassing claims 1-19, 11-15, and 17-27
Group C, subspecies I, encompassing claims 1-13, 15, and 17-27
in the reply filed on 08/10/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that
Currently amended claim 1 includes a special technical feature further stating the supporting layer includes a plurality of fibers that extend from the first porous layer to the second porous layer
Regarding Group A, Gravdahl does not teach the wettability of the supporting layer, and thus the two subspecies share a common special technical feature of a supporting layer with a defined wettability property.
Regarding Groups B-C, new claim 28 makes it so groups B and C share a technical feature of the porous layer including macroscopic pores
This is not found persuasive because
The newly amended technical feature of independent claim 1 is taught by Gravdahl (US 3424163) as demonstrated in the analysis of claim 1 below
Regarding Group A, the examiner argues that any material would have some sort of wettability (hydrophilic, hydrophobic, or otherwise) as an inherent property. The separation of species of the supporting layer being hydrophilic or hydrophobic is still proper since they are mutually exclusive to one another.
Regarding groups B-C, the shared technical feature of the macroscopic pores are taught by newly cited (GB 2148126), as demonstrated in the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 below. As such, the separation of species of the macroscopic pores of the layers being of the same size vs different sizes, and between the pores being of the same shape/of different shapes is still proper since the properties of being the same or different in those manners are mutually exclusive to one another.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6-8, 20-22, 25, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao (CN 111991136) in view of Gravdahl (US 3424163), and further in view of Sanchez (US 20160374848). “Color and chemical constitution of natural dye henna (Lawsonia inermis L) and its application in the coloration of textiles” (hereinafter Bhuiyan et al) will be utilized as extrinsic evidence for claim 7.
Regarding claim 1, Xiao discloses a fluid collection assembly (abstract), comprising:
a fluid impermeable layer at least defining a chamber, at least one opening, and a chamber (fig. 4, soft rubber shell 1 defining an opening and a chamber as the fluid impermeable layer), and
a porous material disposed in the chamber (fig. 4, porous material demonstrated as water absorption body 2 in fig. 2, with elastic cotton cloth layer 2a, and a permeable water-guiding sponge layer 2b), the porous material including:
a first porous layer having a first length (fig. 4, one of the cotton cloth layer 2a or water-guiding sponge layer 2b)
a second porous layer having a second length (fig. 4, the other of the cotton cloth layer 2a or water-guiding sponge layer 2b)
Xiao does not teach a supporting layer positioned and extending between at least substantially all of the first length and at least substantially all of the second length of the second porous layer, wherein the supporting layer includes a plurality of fibers that generally extend from the first porous layer to the second porous layer.
However, Gravdahl teaches an absorbent article (abstract) that comprises a supporting layer (14) positioned and extending between at least substantially all of a length of the first porous layer and at least substantially all of the second length of the second porous layer (fig. 2, thin layer 14 made from cellulose wad to strengthen the napkin, col. 2, lines 30-35), wherein the supporting layer includes a plurality of fibers (col. 2, lines 30-50 describes the layer 14 comprising a cellulose wad, wherein cellulose necessarily has a plurality of fibers) that generally extend from the first porous layer to the second porous layer (fig. 2, distribution layer 14 goes between the outer layer 12 and the core 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that it comprises a supporting layer positioned and extending between at least substantially all of the first length and at least substantially all of the second length of the second porous layer, wherein the supporting layer includes a plurality of fibers that generally extend from the first porous layer to the second porous layer, as taught by Gravdahl, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that strengthens the device (see Gravdahl, col. 2, lines 30-35).
Xiao appears to teach the impermeable layer as a soft rubber shell.
However, if this is not clearly envisioned by the applicant, Sanchez teaches a female catheter with a fluid impermeable layer (fig. 32, fluid impermeable backing 1650).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that it comprises a fluid impermeable layer, as taught by Sanchez, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that prevents the assembly from leaking outside of the inner cavity of the device (see Sanchez, paragraph 0066).
Regarding claim 4, Xiao discloses the first porous layer is hydrophilic (first porous layer 2a is described as an elastic cotton cloth layer, wherein cotton is hydrophilic).
Regarding claim 6, Xiao discloses wherein the second porous layer is spaced further from the at least one opening than the first porous layer (fig. 2, water absorbing body 2 is further from the opening than elastic cotton cloth layer 2a)
Regarding claim 7, Xiao does not teach wherein the second porous layer is hydrophobic
However, Sanchez teaches wherein a comparable permeable support is made of polyester fibers (paragraph 0129), which are known to by hydrophobic (see Bhuiyan et al, pg. 21, 2nd paragraph.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the second porous layer is hydrophobic, as taught by Sanchez, for the purpose of providing a suitable material that can remain odor free (see Sanchez, paragraph 0129).
Regarding claim 8, Xiao discloses wherein the second porous layer defines a bore configured to receive a conduit (fig. 2, bore in the absorbing body 2 to receive the pipe 3).
Regarding claim 20, Xiao discloses wherein at least one of the first porous layer, the second porous layer, or the supporting layer is formed from at least one of polyester, polypropylene, nylon, cellulose, cotton, or bamboo (fig. 2, layer 2a as the first porous layer as an elastic cotton cloth layer).
Regarding claim 21, Xiao does not teach the device further comprising a fluid permeable membrane disposed on at least a portion of the first porous layer, the fluid permeable membrane extending across the opening.
However, Gravdahl teaches a further fluid permeable membrane (13) disposed on at least a portion of the first porous layer, the fluid permeable membrane extending across the opening (fig. 2, thin coarse meshed net 13 on top of the liquid pervious layer).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao to further comprise a fluid permeable membrane disposed on at least a portion of the first porous layer, the fluid permeable membrane extending across the opening, as taught by Gravdahl, for the purpose of providing a suitable means of preventing or reducing surface piling (see Gravdahl, col. 3, lines 16-29).
Regarding claim 22, Xiao discloses a fluid collection system (abstract), comprising:
A fluid collection assembly including
a fluid impermeable layer at least defining a chamber, at least one opening, and a chamber (fig. 4, soft rubber shell 1 defining an opening and a chamber as the fluid impermeable layer), and
a porous material disposed in the chamber (fig. 4, porous material demonstrated as water absorption body 2 in fig. 2, with elastic cotton cloth layer 2a, and a permeable water-guiding sponge layer 2b), the porous material including:
a first porous layer having a first length (fig. 4, one of the cotton cloth layer 2a or water-guiding sponge layer 2b)
a second porous layer having a second length (fig. 4, the oter of the cotton cloth layer 2a or water-guiding sponge layer 2b)
Xiao does not teach a supporting layer positioned and extending between at least substantially all of the first length and at least substantially all of the second length of the second porous layer, wherein the supporting layer includes a plurality of fibers that generally extend from the first porous layer to the second porous layer, the system further comprising a fluid storage container, and a vacuum source, wherein the chamber of the fluid collection assembly, the fluid storage container, and the vacuum source are in fluid communication with each that, when one or more bodily fluids are present in the chamber, a suction provided from the vacuum source to the chamber of the fluid collection assembly removes the one or more bodily fluids from the chamber and deposits the bodily fluids in the fluid storage container.
However, Gravdahl teaches an absorbent article (abstract) that comprises a supporting layer (14) positioned and extending between at least substantially all of a length of the first porous layer and at least substantially all of the second length of the second porous layer (fig. 2, thin layer 14 made from cellulose wad to strengthen the napkin, col. 2, lines 30-35), wherein the supporting layer includes a plurality of fibers (col. 2, lines 30-50 describes the layer 14 comprising a cellulose wad, wherein cellulose necessarily has a plurality of fibers) that generally extend from the first porous layer to the second porous layer (fig. 2, distribution layer 14 goes between the outer layer 12 and the core 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that it comprises a supporting layer positioned and extending between at least substantially all of the first length and at least substantially all of the second length of the second porous layer, wherein the supporting layer includes a plurality of fibers that generally extend from the first porous layer to the second porous layer, as taught by Gravdahl, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that strengthens the device (see Gravdahl, col. 2, lines 30-35).
Xiao appears to teach the impermeable layer as a soft rubber shell.
However, if this is not clearly envisioned by the applicant, Sanchez teaches a female catheter with a fluid impermeable layer (fig. 32, fluid impermeable backing 1650).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that it comprises a fluid impermeable layer, as taught by Sanchez, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that prevents the assembly from leaking outside of the inner cavity of the device (see Sanchez, paragraph 0066).
Moreover, Sanchez teaches the system further comprising a fluid storage container (fig. 4, external reservoir 260), and a vacuum source (fig. 4, vacuum source 270), wherein the chamber of the fluid collection assembly, the fluid storage container, and the vacuum source are in fluid communication with each that, when one or more bodily fluids are present in the chamber, a suction provided from the vacuum source (270) to the chamber of the fluid collection assembly removes the one or more bodily fluids from the chamber and deposits the bodily fluids in the fluid storage container (paragraph 0084).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device discloses in Xiao such that the system further comprises a fluid storage container, and a vacuum source, wherein the chamber of the fluid collection assembly, the fluid storage container, and the vacuum source are in fluid communication with each that, when one or more bodily fluids are present in the chamber, a suction provided from the vacuum source to the chamber of the fluid collection assembly removes the one or more bodily fluids from the chamber and deposits the bodily fluids in the fluid storage container, as taught by Sanchez, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that can remove urine from the system for disposal (see Sanchez, paragraph 0084).
Regarding claim 25, Xiao does not teach wherein the second porous layer includes a polyester.
However, Sanchez teaches wherein a permeable support (1440) can be made of polyester fibers (paragraph 0129).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the second porous layer includes a polyester, as taught by Sanchez, for the purpose of providing a suitable material that can remain odor free (see Sanchez, paragraph 0129).
Regarding claim 29, Xiao, as modified by Gravdahl, does not teach wherein the supporting layer exhibits a thickness that is greater than a thickness of the first porous layer and greater than a thickness of the second porous layer.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao in view of Gravdahl such that the supporting layer exhibits a thickness that is greater than a thickness of the first porous layer and greater than a thickness of the second porous layer, as a combination of thicknesses that one of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious to try. See MPEP 2143(I)(E). In this instance, modifying the thickness of the support layer relative to the first and second porous layers would have options of having it thinner, thicker, or the same thickness at the layers, where one of ordinary skill in the art would experiment with for a combination that optimizes stiffness/support and absorbency of the article.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl and Sanchez, and further in view of Cottenden (US 5702381).
Regarding claim 2, Xiao discloses wherein the structure exhibits a thickness of less than or equal to 2 cm (see translation, pg. 3, 4th paragraph), but does not teach wherein the porous material exhibits a thickness of about 1 cm to about 3 cm.
However, Cottenden teaches an incontinence device (abstract) wherein a thickness of an absorbent structure between 1 cm and 1.5 cm (col. 4, lines 1-17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device discloses in Xiao such that a thickness of the porous material is between 1-3 cm, as taught by Cottenden, as applicant appears to have not placed criticality on the claimed range (PGPUB suggests multiple acceptable ranges of thickness, including 5 mm or greater to 3-4 cm.), and since it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 3 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl and Sanchez, and further in view of Meyer (US 4798603)
Regarding claim 3, Xiao is silent to wherein the porous material exhibits a basis weight of about 150 g/m2 to about 800 g/m2.
However, Meyer teaches wherein the filaments of an absorbent body range from 400-1200 g/m2 (col. 5, lines 1-22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in ref A such that the porous material exhibits a basis weight of about 150 g/m2 to about 800 g/m, as taught by Meyer, as applicant appears to have not placed criticality on the claimed range (PGPUB grants multiple acceptable ranges of basis weight from ranging from 50-100 g/m2 to 900-1000 g/m2).
Regarding claim 19, Xiao is silent to wherein the supporting layer is hydrophobic.
However, Meyer teaches a middle transport layer being substantially hydrophobic (col. 2, lines 3-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the supporting layer is hydrophobic, as taught by Meyer, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that rapidly conducts fluid to the center and inhibits the flowback of absorbed liquid (see Meyer, col. 2, lines 3-10).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl and Sanchez, and further in view of Oetjen (US 20080208153)
Regarding claim 5, Xiao is silent to wherein the first porous layer exhibits a thickness that is about 400 microns or less.
However, Oetjen teaches wherein a comparable topsheet can be in the thickness range of 0.1-2 millimeters (or 100-2000 microns) (paragraph 0030).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the first porous layer exhibits a thickness that is about 400 microns or less, as taught by Oetjen, for the purpose of providing an acceptable thickness to an article without being too bulky. Moreover, applicant does not appear to have placed criticality on the claimed range (paragraph 0026 grants multiple acceptable ranges of first porous layer thickness), and it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 9 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl and Sancez, and further in view of Cottenden ‘126 (GB 2148126, hereinafter Cottenden ‘126).
Regarding claim 9, Xiao does not teach wherein the plurality of macroscopic pores exhibit a first average macroscopic pore size and the plurality of second macroscopic pores exhibit a second average macroscopic pore size, wherein the first average macroscopic pore size is about 1 mm to about 8 mm and the second average macroscopic pore size is about 1 mm to about 8 mm.
However, Cottenden ‘126 teaches the advantage of a macroscopic pore size of 2 mm allowing for rapid urine penetration into the system while baffling reverse flow (pg. 1, lines 45-60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the plurality of macroscopic pores exhibit a first average macroscopic pore size and the plurality of second macroscopic pores exhibit a second average macroscopic pore size, wherein the first average macroscopic pore size is about 1 mm to about 8 mm and the second average macroscopic pore size is about 1 mm to about 8 mm, as taught by Cottenden ‘126, for the purpose of providing a suitable pore size that allows for rapid penetration of urine by the body, while simultaneously baffling backwards flow (pg. 1, lines 45-60).
Regarding claim 28, Xiao does not teach wherein the first porous layer includes a plurality of first macroscopic pores and the second porous layer includes a plurality of second macroscopic pores
However, Cottenden ‘126 teaches a resilient material having a pore size of about 2 mm and a major void volume (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the first porous layer includes a plurality of first macroscopic pores and the second porous layer includes a plurality of second macroscopic pores, as taught by Cottenden ‘126, for the purpose of providing a suitable pore size for both layers that facilitates rapid penetration of urine while simultaneously baffling movement of urine held therein and reducing possibility of leakage back through the aperture (pg. 1, lines 45-60).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl, Sanchez, and Cottenden ‘126, and further in view of Cree (US 5591149).
Regarding claim 11, Xiao, as modified by Cottenden ‘126, does not teach wherein the plurality of first macroscopic pores exhibit a first average macroscopic pore size and the plurality of second macroscopic pores exhibit a second average macroscopic pore size, but does not teach wherein the first average macroscopic pore size is different from the second average macroscopic pore size.
However, Cree teaches wherein a pore size gradient going from larger at the surface and smaller away from the surface (col. 20, lines 31-45).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao in view of Cottenden ‘126 such that the first average macroscopic pore size is different from the second average macroscopic pore size, as taught by Cree, for the purpose of providing a suitable means of better distributing liquids to the second layer and increasing said layer’s effective capacity (see Cree, col. 20, lines 31-45).
Regarding claim 12, Xiao, as modified by Cottenden ‘126 wherein the first average macroscopic pore size is greater than the second average macroscopic pore size.
However, Cree teaches wherein a pore size gradient going from larger at the surface and smaller away from the surface (col. 20, lines 31-45).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao in view of Cottenden ‘126 such that the first average macroscopic pore size is greater than the second average macroscopic pore size, as taught by Cree, for the purpose of providing a suitable means of better distributing liquids to the second layer and increasing said layer’s effective capacity (see Cree, col. 20, lines 31-45).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl, Sanchez, and Cottenden ‘126, and further in view of Bagger-Sjöbäck (US 20150328061)
Regarding claim 13, Xiao, as modified by Cottenden ‘126, discloses wherein the plurality of first macroscopic pores exhibit a first shape and the plurality of second macroscopic pores exhibit a second shape (macroscopic pores would inherently have a shape), but is silent to wherein the first shape is substantially the same as the second shape
However, Bagger-Sjöbäck teaches an absorbent article (abstract), wherein porous layers having the same general shape of pores (i.e., circular) is a well known practice in the art (fig. 3, pores in absorbent body 103 and liquid-absorbent fibrous layer 105 are both circular).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao in view of Cottenden ‘126 such that the first shape is substantially the same as the second shape, as taught by Bagger-Sjöbäck, as one of ordinary skill in the art would be capable of choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions (i.e., between the two sets of pores having the same shape or not) with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl, Sanchez, and further in view of Richardson (GB 2452052).
Regarding claim 15, Xiao, as modified by Gravdalh, does not teach wherein the plurality of fibers includes a plurality of microfilaments
However, Richardson teaches an absorbent core utilizes a faster-drying microfibre fabric (pg. 3, last paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the plurality of fibers includes a plurality of microfilaments, as taught by Richardson, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that is quicker to dry to better user feel (see Richardson, pg. 3, last paragraph).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl and Sanchez, and further in view of Michiels (US 20150342799).
Regarding claim 17, Xiao does not teach wherein the supporting layer exhibits a percent void space that is greater than the percent void space of at least one of the first porous layer or the second porous layer.
However, Michiels teaches a void volume gradient wherein a middle layer (i.e., similar to supporting layer) has a greater void volume than the layer below (i.e., similar to the second porous layer) (paragraph 0098).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the supporting layer exhibits a percent void space that is greater than the percent void space of at least one of the first porous layer or the second porous layer, as taught by Michiels, for the purpose of providing a suitable gradient that results in a higher liquid uptake speed (see Michiels, paragraph 0098).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdal and Sanchez, and further in view of Berg (US 4685909).
Regarding claim 23, Xiao does not teach wherein the first porous layer includes polypropylene
However, Berg teaches an absorbent article (abstract) wherein a comparable topsheet is formed from polypropylene (col. 4, lines 21-40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the first porous layer includes polypropylene, as taught and suggested by Berg, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, in this instance for a contact layer for the patient. See MPEP 2144.07.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl and Sanchez, and further in view of Lenherr (WO 2016207242).
Regarding claim 24, Xiao, as modified by Gravdahl, discloses wherein the support layer is cellulose wadding (see Gravdahl, col. 3, lines 30-37), but does not teach wherein the support layer includes bamboo.
However, Lenherr teaches wherein for absorbent fibrous material, cellulose wadding and bamboo are known equivalents in the art (see translation, pg. 2, 2nd paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed n Xiao in view of Gravdahl such that the support layer includes bamboo, as taught by Lenherr, because the cellulose wadding and bamboo were art-recognized equivalents at the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and as such one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute cellulose wadding for bamboo. See MPEP 2144(I).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl and Sanchez, and further in view of Argenta (US 5645081).
Regarding claim 26, Xiao does not teach wherein the second porous layer is a foam.
However, Argenta teaches a wound drainage system (abstract) that utilizes a polyester foam section (col. 5, lines 23-25).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao in view of Sanchez such that the polyester layer is a foam, as taught by Argenta, for the purpose of providing an alternative material that can be utilizes to take in fluid.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Gravdahl and Sanchez, and further in view of Berg and Lenherr.
Regarding claim 27, Xiao does not teach wherein the first porous layer includes polypropylene, the support layer includes bamboo, and the second porous layer includes a polyester.
However, Berg teaches an absorbent article (abstract) wherein a comparable topsheet is formed from polypropylene (col. 4, lines 21-40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the first porous layer includes polypropylene, as taught by Berg, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, in this instance for a contact layer for the patient. See MPEP 2144.07.
However, Lenherr teaches wherein for absorbent fibrous material, cellulose wadding and bamboo are known equivalents in the art (see translation, pg. 2, 2nd paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao in view of Gravdahl such that the support layer includes bamboo, as taught by Lenherr, because the cellulose wadding and bamboo were art-recognized equivalents at the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and as such one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute cellulose wadding for bamboo. See MPEP 2144(I).
Further, Sanchez teaches wherein a permeable support (1440) can be made of polyester fibers (paragraph 0129).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Xiao such that the second porous layer includes a polyester, as taught by Sanchez, for the purpose of providing a suitable material that can remain odor free (see Sanchez, paragraph 0129).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON W LEVY whose telephone number is (571)272-7582. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM- 4:00 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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at 5712705879. 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.
/Brandon W. Levy/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights