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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 13, filed 29JUN2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 have been fully considered and are moot in view of new grounds of rejection prompted by Applicant’s amendment to claims. A new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Chatterjee in view of Raycheck. Chatterjee teaches the ability to alter spacing of elastic members which reasonably combines with Raycheck’s teachings of varying spacing of elastic members.
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 10, filed 29JUN2026, with respect to the Drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to the Drawings has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 13, filed 29JUN2026, with respect to Claims 8, 10, 19, 25-27, 44, and 46 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection of said Claims has been withdrawn.
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.
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, 2, 4, 8, 10, 13-19, 22, 27, 37, 42-46, and 60 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170333262 A1 (Chatterjee et al.) in view of US 20160270985 A1 (Raycheck et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Chatterjee teaches an absorbent article (10) (Fig. 1) comprising a main portion (20) extending in a length direction (the direction along central length axis 100) along a central length axis (100) between a front edge (13) and a rear edge (19) of said absorbent article, and in a width direction (the direction along central width axis 110) along a central width axis (110), perpendicular to said central length axis (Fig. 1) between a pair of side edges (12) of said absorbent article, and extending in a height direction (not labeled, but the thickness of the article would represent the height direction) perpendicular to said width and length directions, the main portion defining a main inner surface (the article interior between the front, rear, and side edges, as seen in Fig. 1) extending primarily along said width and length directions to be directed towards the wearer when the article is worn (the topsheet being body facing) [0037], and a main outer surface (26) extending primarily along said width and length directions to be directed away from the wearer when the article is worn [0037];
the main portion defining a front region (14) comprising said front edge and a rear region (18) comprising said rear edge, and a crotch region (16) located between the front and rear regions (as seen in Fig. 1), the front region and the rear region are structured such that said front edge and said rear edge form part of a waist edge (14 and 18 forming the waist) [0035] encircling the waist of a user when the article is worn [0035],
the article further comprising a pocket member (40) extending along a pocket length (from 46 to 47 in Fig. 1, or L in Fig. 5) in said length direction between a pocket rear edge (47) and a pocket front edge (46), and along a pocket width (between edges 48, as seen in Fig. 1) [0055] in said width direction between a pair of pocket side edges (48),
wherein said pocket member is attached to said rear region of the main portion by a rear attachment element ([0064] describing the attachment of rear and side edges) extending along the pocket rear edge and by side attachment elements, each side attachment element extending along a pocket side edge such that said rear and side attachment elements form a closed faeces boundary between said pocket member and said main portion of said absorbent article with an opening at said pocket front edge towards the crotch region of said main portion ([0051-0052] describing the formation of the pocket wherein pocket 43 is formed by bonding the borders except the front edge which is open to form said pocket),
characterized by said pocket member comprising a plurality of elastic members (55) providing said pocket member with elastic characteristics along said width direction (being taught to gather about the waist in [0035]),
said elastic members being distributed over the pocket length of said pocket member so as to form
a first elastic zone (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) extending from said pocket rear edge along the length direction and
a second elastic zone (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) extending from said pocket front edge along the length direction, and an intermediate zone (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) extending in said length direction from said first elastic zone to said second elastic zone and over at least 20% of the pocket length (Chatterjee teaches a plurality of spacing arrangements [0073], the ability to select the number of elastic members [0072], and the spacing between elastic members may be varied. When considering these teachings, the first and second zones may comprise two elements spaced 4 mm apart, the intermediate zone may be separate by at least 12 mm, thereby resulting in the claimed configuration), and
an average distribution of said elastic members in said intermediate zone is less than 0.5 elastic members per cm as seen in the length direction (the teachings of [0073] teaching spacing greater than 0.5 elastic members per cm being possible).
PNG
media_image1.png
274
814
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5
While Chatterjee teaches a system where the spacing of elastic members may be varied, the reference fails to explicitly teach an average distribution of said elastic members in each of said first and second elastic zone is greater than 1 member/cm, as seen in the length direction.
Raycheck teaches an absorbent article (20) (Fig. 12) wherein the pocket member (81) comprises a first elastic zone, second elastic zone, and intermediate elastic zone (Raycheck Annotated Fig. 12), wherein an average distribution of said elastic members in said intermediate zone is less than 0.5 elastic members per cm (zero being less than 0.5) as seen in the length direction, and wherein an average distribution of said elastic members in each of said first and second elastic zone is greater than 1 member/cm, as seen in the length direction [0117], to allow for control of contractive forces [0120]/.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the elastic member spacing of Chatterjee with the spacing taught by Raycheck in order to control contractive forces of the elastic members [Raycheck 0117, 0120].
PNG
media_image2.png
207
636
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Raycheck Annotated Fig. 12
Regarding Claims 2 and 4, Chatterjee is considered to teach said intermediate zone (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) extends in said length direction (along 100) over 80% or less of the pocket length (L), as well as wherein each one out of the first and second elastic zones (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) extends over at least 10% of the pocket length as seen in the length direction by the same reasoning of Claim 1 wherein spacing can be varied.
Regarding Claim 8, Chatterjee further teaches the average distribution of said elastic members (55) is 1 to 3 members/cm as seen in the length direction ([0073] teaching a spacing of 3.5 mm).
Regarding Claim 10, Chatterjee further teaches in the first and second elastic zones (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5), a distance as seen in the length direction (along 100) between each pair of two neighboring elastic members (55) is at least 3 mm [0073], as seen in the length direction(L).
Regarding Claim 13, Chatterjee further teaches the elastic members (55) are elastic threads (strands being considered equivalent to threads) [0071].
Regarding Claim 14, Chatterjee further teaches the elastic members (55) in said first and second elastic zones (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) have an elasticity within the range of 100% to 250% ([0032] detailing the required elasticity of elastic materials with materials having at least 110% elasticity to be considered elastic).
Regarding Claim 15, Chatterjee further teaches the first elastic zone (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) is arranged adjacent said rear edge (19) of the main portion (20), so as to form a rear waist elastic (being placed at the waist and being elastic), contributing to the elasticity of the rear region (18) of said main portion around the waist of the user when said article (100) is worn [0003].
Regarding Claim 16, Chatterjee is considered to teach said rear region (18) of said main portion (20) is free from elastic members (55) providing elasticity in the width direction, the elastic members being a component added on by pocket (40) (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 17, Chatterjee further teaches the main portion (20) is free from elastic members providing elasticity in the width direction (along 110) as the elastic members of leg cuffs (12) provide elasticity in the length direction (along 100), and elastic members (55) being a component of pocket (40), not the main portion.
Regarding Claim 18, Chatterjee further teaches the rear attachment element ([0064] describing the attachment of rear and side edges, and extending along the pocket rear edge and by side attachment elements, as cited in Claim 1) at least partially, preferably completely, overlaps the first elastic zone (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) as seen along the height direction (the side edges being bonded in an overlapping relationship with the elastic members as described in [0064]). ).
Regarding Claim 19, Chatterjee further teaches said pocket member (40) comprises two layers of sheet material (44 and 45) and wherein said elastic members (55) are positioned between said two layers of sheet material [0061] (Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 22, Chatterjee further teaches said two layers (44 and 45) are formed by a continuous piece of sheet material being folded around said elastic members (55) [0053], and joined by a joint (“joined” in [0053] and joined by closure bonds 51 in [0061]) to form said pocket member (40).
Regarding Claim 27, Chatterjee further teaches said sheet material (as described in Claim 19) is a nonwoven material comprising fibers composed out of one or more components [0032], the components being polymer components (teaching polyurethane).
Regarding Claim 37, Chatterjee further teaches said absorbent article (10) further comprises a pair of leakage barriers (71), each leakage barrier being joined to the inner main surface (being attached by bonds 82 [0103]) of the main portion (20) along a leakage barrier joint (along the length where the barriers are bonded, as seen in Fig. 1) extending in said length direction at least along said crotch portion (16) (shown in Fig. 1), said leakage barrier extending from said leakage barrier joint in the height and/or width direction along a leakage barrier width to a leakage barrier edge (extending to the outer edge as seen in Fig. 1 and necessarily having a height), wherein a leakage barrier active region is provided at least in said crotch portion of the main portion (where the leakage barrier interacts with the legs in the crotch region, extending between ears 32 and 34, Fig. 1), the leakage barrier active region being a region in which each leakage barrier extends freely from said leakage barrier joint along said leakage barrier width to a free leakage barrier edge (72), wherein said free leakage barrier edge comprises a leakage barrier elastic member (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 1) to provide elasticity generally along the length direction of said free leakage barrier edge (Fig. 1), and wherein said pocket member is arranged in a non-overlapping relationship with said leakage barrier elastic member as seen in the height direction of the article (as seen in Fig. 9).
PNG
media_image3.png
980
747
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 1
Regarding Claim 42, Chatterjee further teaches said pocket member (40) is arranged in a non-overlapping relationship with said leakage barrier active region (where the leakage barrier interacts with the legs in the crotch region, extending between ears 32 and 34, Fig. 1), as seen in the height direction H (seen to not overlap in Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 43, Chatterjee further teaches a distance in the length direction between said pocket front edge (46) and said leakage barrier active region (where the leakage barrier interacts with the legs in the crotch region, extending between ears 32 and 34, Fig. 1), said distance being between the front edge to the end of ear (34).
Regarding Claim 44, Chatterjee further teaches a leakage barrier fastening region (the area where the leg cuffs are bonded to the main portion 20) is provided, wherein said leakage barrier (71) is fastened to said inner main surface (the body facing surface described in Claim 28) of said main portion (20) at a leakage barrier fastening element (the bond for attaching the leakage barrier as described in [0057]) between said leakage barrier joint and said leakage barrier edge, such that said leakage barrier extends freely from said leakage barrier fastening element in the height direction (as it necessarily has a height) along a leakage barrier unfastened width (the distance seen in Fig. 1 between (71) and (72)) being less than the leakage barrier width (as it excludes the bonded portions).
Regarding Claim 45, Chatterjee further teaches the pocket member (40) is arranged in a partly overlapping relationship with said leakage barrier fastening region (the area where the leg cuffs are bonded to the main portion 20) as seen in the height direction (Fig. 1 showing the overlap).
Regarding Claim 60, Chatterjee further teaches the intermediate zone (Chatterjee Annotated Fig. 5) consists of said sheet material (44 and 45) and said joint (“joined” in [0053] and joined by closure bonds 51 in [0061]).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of US 20230190542 A1 (Bishop et al.).
Regarding Claim 25, Chatterjee fails to teach the basis weight of the sheet material.
Bishop teaches an absorbent article (10) comprising a pocket member (54) having a basis weight within the range from 10 gsm to 60 gsm (teaching 10 gsm to 40 gsm [0121].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sheet material of Chatterjee in view of Raycheck with an undisclosed basis weight to be a material having the basis weight taught by Bishop as a simple substitution of one known material for another with a reasonable expectation of forming a pocket in an absorbent article MPEP 2143 I. ).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of US 20090326495 A1 (MacDonald et al.).
Regarding Claim 26, Chatterjee fails to teach the air permeability or water vapor transmission rate of the sheet material.
MacDonald teaches an absorbent article (22) comprising a pocket (37) consisting of a breathable film material having a Material Water Vapor Transmission rate of at least 2000 g/m2/24h [0035].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the material of Chatterjee in view of Raycheck with the breathable film of MacDonald to allow vapors to escape while retaining liquids [MacDonald 0035].
Claim(s) 28, 31, 32, and 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of US 5221274 A (Buell et al.).
Regarding Claim 28, Chatterjee further teaches the main portion (20) comprises an absorbent core (28) [0037] extending at least in the crotch region (16) (shown in the crotch region in Fig. 1) of the main portion, wherein said main portion comprises a top sheet (24) forming at least a part of said inner main surface ([0039] describing the top sheet facing the wearer), and a back sheet forming at least a part of said outer main surface ([0043] describing the back sheet as being garment facing), said absorbent core being arranged between said top sheet and said back sheet [0037].
Chatterjee fails to teach wherein said pocket member is arranged in a non-overlapping relationship in relation to said absorbent core as seen in the height direction, but teaches the article may be assembled in well-known configurations, such as those taught by Buell [0038].
Buell teaches an absorbent article wherein a pocket member (waist flap 89 corresponding to the pocket of Chatterjee) is arranged in a non-overlapping relationship in relation to the absorbent core (28) as seen in the height direction (shown in Fig. 1).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the arrangement of the absorbent core to not overlap with the pocket as taught by Buell as a simple substitution of one well-known configuration for another, with a reasonable expectation of protecting the user MPEP 2143 I.
Regarding Claim 31, Chatterjee in view of Raycheck and Buell fails to teach the distance between the pocket and absorbent core.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the distance in the length direction between said pocket front edge (46) and said absorbent core (28) to be 5 mm or more as the size and arrangement of components is varied to accommodate wearers of different sizes (Buell Col. 9: ll. 12-14).
Regarding Claim 32, Chatterjee further teaches each one of said side attachment elements (as described in Claim 1) is arranged outward of said absorbent core (28), as seen along the width direction (along 110), edges (48) shown to be outward of the core in Fig. 1.
Regarding Claim 41, Chatterjee in view of Raycheck fails to teach a distance in the length direction between said pocket front edge and said leakage barrier elastic member, said distance being at least 10mm.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the distance in the length direction between said pocket front edge and said leakage barrier elastic member to be 10 mm or more as the size and arrangement of components is varied to accommodate wearers of different sizes (Buell Col. 9: ll. 12-14).
Claim(s) 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Raycheck.
Regarding Claim 46, Chatterjee fails to teach the leakage barrier unfastened width is less than 50% of said leakage barrier width.
Chatterjee teaches varying bond sizes, bond areas, and bonding methods [0024].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the undisclosed leakage barrier unfastened width through routine experimentation to be less than 50% of the leakage barrier width when accounting for the desire to ensure conformity to the wearer’s body [0003], thereby providing a snug fit around the legs [0002].
"[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." See MPEP 2144.05 and In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 12324730 B2, US 11458046 B2, US 10470943 B2, US 20170296401 A1, US 20170246055 A1, US 20170246054 A1, US 20150182388 A1, US 20080255532 A1, and US 20080147025 A1 disclose absorbent articles comprising a pocket with elastic members.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 HANS KALIHER whose telephone number is (303)297-4453. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 08:00-05:00 MT.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/HANS KALIHER/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/CATHARINE L ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights