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
The Examiner acknowledges the remarks and amendments filed on 4/20/26. Claim 9 has been canceled. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 11-13, 16-18, and 20 have been amended. Claims 1-8 and 10-22 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC paragraph 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) 1-8 and 10-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isoda JP_0856772_A (see machine English translation).
1. Regarding Claims 1-5, 13, and 22, In Example 1, paragraphs [0021]-[0028] and Fig. 4, Isoda discloses a thermoplastic fiber web structure (the net matrix 10 shown in Fig. 4 that is made of a thermoplastic resin material as described in Example 1, and melt extruded into a matrix net, paragraph [0023]), characterized in that the thermoplastic fiber web structure forms a support (paragraph [0023]: prior to thermoforming, the matrix net has an apparent density of 45 kg/m3 and a 25% compression hardness of 14 kg, and after thermoforming a density of 65 kg/m3 (paragraphs [0028]), i.e. it is a support) structure through fiber filaments (paragraph [0023]: filaments are ejected from the nozzles) that are melt-bonded together (paragraph [0023]: the filaments are contact fused together), the fiber filaments being formed from a thermoplastic elastomer material (paragraph [0021]: a polyester-based elastomer block copolymer having hard segments of polybutylene terephthalate and soft segments of polyether; as is being claimed in instant Claims 2 and 4). Isoda also discloses using, alternatively, polyolefin elastomers (paragraph 0009; as is being claimed in instant Claim 3). Isoda further discloses that said its elastomer can also be nylon (paragraph 0009; as is being claimed in instant Claim 5). The thermoplastic fiber web structure in Isoda is used in an automobile interior part such as a seat cushion (Fig. 1 and paragraph [0028]) together with a sleeve (fiberfill web 11 and its preparation disclosed in paragraph [0026], i.e. a needled carded nonwoven web; as claimed in instant Claims 13 and 14) fastened to the thermoplastic fiber web by means of the melt-blown adhesive layer 14 (paragraphs [0027] - [0028]; as being claimed in instant Claim 22). Isoda discloses having density differences in localized regions including a density difference ranging from 0.01 g/cm3 to 0.2 g/cm3 which overlaps with the claimed range (Page 23: paragraph 0013).
2. Regarding Claims 7 and 8, Isoda discloses that “a preferred embodiment is also one in which the matrix layer and the core have a laminated structure of different finenesses, which is an optimum combination of filaments with apparent density, as required” (paragraph 0013, Page 23). As such, said “laminated” structure will inherently require some degree of orderly stacking of said fibers in a region.
3. Regarding Claim 10, Isoda discloses using hollow fiber filaments (paragraph 0015).
4. Regarding Claim 11, Isoda discloses that the denier can be as low as 100 while the density can be as low as 0.005 g/cm3 (paragraph 0013) which would result in a size of 1.68 mm diameter.
5. Regarding Claim 12, Isoda discloses a density ranging from 0.01 g/cm3 to 0.20 g/cm3 (paragraph 0013) which meets the claimed range.
6. Regarding Claims 13-21, Isoda discloses a hook (paragraph 0028) and the general embodiment of having a thermoplastic strip. The details of which would depend on end-user specifications that are known to vary. Applicants have not indicated how the claimed range results in unexpected properties.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants state: “First, amended independent claim 1 is not disclosed or suggested by Isoda. Particularly, Isoda is silent to the recited, "fiber filaments in at least one local region from the at least two local regions [with different densities and from the thermoplastic fiber web structure]" of amended claim 1. According to the present application, the technical problem of improving comfort is solved by specifically arranging the fiber filaments in an orderly arrangement and stacking manner in at least one local region and providing multiple local regions with different densities. This distribution manner is different from the random distribution as commonly used in the known prior art, including Isoda.”
The Examiner respectfully submits that Isoda discloses having density differences in localized regions including a density difference ranging from 0.01 g/cm3 to 0.2 g/cm3 which overlaps with the claimed range (Page 23: paragraph 0013). Isoda discloses that “a preferred embodiment is also one in which the matrix layer and the core have a laminated structure of different finenesses, which is an optimum combination of filaments with apparent density, as required” (paragraph 0013, Page 23). As such, said “laminated” structure will inherently require some degree of orderly stacking of said fibers in a region.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAHSEEN KHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1140. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Saturdays 08:00AM-10:00PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 5712701547. 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.
/TAHSEEN KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 May 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights