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
1. Applicant’s amendments and accompanying remarks filed 7/13/26 have been fully considered and entered. Claims 1, 4 and 9 have been amended. Claim 3 is canceled. New claims 10-18 have been added. Applicants’ amendments are found sufficient to overcome the 112 2nd paragraph rejections set forth in the Action dated 4/14/26. As such, these rejections are hereby withdrawn. Regarding the claims rejected over the cited prior art of JP2019199029A, Applicant’s amendments are found sufficient to overcome the obvious rejections. Specifically, the cited prior art of JP2019199029A does not teach an adhesive layer having the claimed plurality of holes. As such, these rejections are hereby withdrawn. However, upon further consideration the following new ground of rejection is set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. Claim(s) 1-2 and 3-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2019199029A in view of Jin et al., US 2022/0153002 A.
Regarding claim 1, the published JP reference teach a laminated sheet having a first non-woven fabric that can be printed without providing a surface treatment (see machine translation). The laminated sheet further comprises a second layer comprising 50% by mass or more of hydrophilic short fibers. (see machine translation) The published JP reference teaches that wherein the second layer is a nonwoven fabric formed by an air-laid method and can comprise debfibrated fibers (see machine translation). The first layer includes a first fiber and a first heat-fusible resin fiber, and the first fiber is at least one selected from natural fibers or chemical fibers, One heat-fusible resin is polyethylene resin (PE), polypropylene resin (PP), polyethylene terephthalate resin (PET) such as low melting point polyethylene terephthalate, ethylene / vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA), low melting point polyamide resin, It is at least one selected from the group consisting of a low melting point polylactic acid resin and a polybutylene succinate resin, wherein a functional substance is interposed in the void formed by the first fiber (see machine translation). The first layer contains a functional substance, for example, a metal oxide and / or a metal hydroxide (metal (water) oxide) (see machine translation). Regarding the claimed “breathability”, the published JP reference teach that the non-woven fabric has better air permeability in ink jet printing (see machine translation). The Examiner is of the position that if the fabric is air permeable it would also be “breathable”.
The fiber used for the 2nd layer should just have the said fiber length and is hydrophilic. For example, as fibers, natural fibers such as pulp, hemp, cotton, silk, wool, mineral fibers, regenerated cellulose fibers, polylactic acid resins, polyamide resins, polyvinyl alcohol resins (PVA), superabsorbent resin fibers (SAF), etc. Chemical fibers can be used. The chemical fiber may be surface-treated. These fibers are known to have water absorption. Preferably, it is a pulp fiber. Moreover, as long as the 2nd layer does not lose hydrophilicity, you may contain a hydrophobic fiber as a fiber of the 2nd layer. For example, the heat-fusible resin described below may be used in the form of a fiber. These fibers can be used in the form of, for example, a defibrating shortcut fiber. Two or more of these fibers may be used in combination (see machine translation). With regard to the claimed treatment agent in the second layer, a functional substance such as a metal oxide and / or a metal hydroxide (hereinafter simply referred to as “metal (water) oxide” is mixed into the fibers of the second layer (see machine translation). The Examiner is of the position that the fusible fibers of the metal oxide is sufficient to meet the limitations of a treatment agent. With respect to the recitation/intended use as a garment, the published JP reference does not specifically teach that the fabric is a garment. However, the Examiner is of the position that absent evidence to the contrary the fabric of the published JP reference can be used in the formation of garments. Applicants are invited to prove otherwise.
Regarding the claimed adhesive layer having a plurality of holes, as set forth above, the published JP reference does teach that the laminated sheet may further comprise an adhesive layer containing a second heat-fusible resin formed between any two layers (see machine translation).
The published JP reference does not teach that the adhesive layer comprises a plurality holes.
The published Patent Application issued to Jin et al., teach breathable fabric barrier laminate comprising an resin adhesive layer (title, abstract and paragraph 0045). Jin et al., teach that the resin adhesive layer can be applied such that is discontinuous such as in a grid pattern wherein there is a plurality of islands that are devoid of adhesive resin (paragraph 0045). The Examiner is of the position that such a resin adhesive layer having the disclosed grid pattern meets the limitation of an adhesive layer comprising a plurality of holes. In other words, the plurality of islands within the grid pattern that are devoid of adhesive resin is equivalent to an adhesive layer comprising a plurality of holes. Since both prior art references are concerned with forming similar fabric laminates the Examiner considers the references analogous. As such, based on the combined teachings a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the second layer of adhesive of the published JP reference can be applied in a grid pattern as taught by Jin et al. Motivation to apply a discontinuous pattern of adhesive such as a grid pattern is found in the desire to mitigate against decreasing the breathability of the laminate.
With regard to claims 2 and 10, the basis weight of the laminated sheet is preferably 10 to 4000 g / m <2>, more preferably 30 to 3000 g / m <2>, and still more preferably 50 to 300 g / m <2> (see machine translation).
With regard to claims 4 and 11, the laminated sheet may further comprise an adhesive layer containing a second heat-fusible resin is further formed between any two layers (see machine translation).
With regard to claims 5 and 12, the published JP reference teaches PET fibers above which is type of polyester. The Examiner is of the position that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the polyester fibers can formed from PET.
With regard to claims 6 and 13, the published JP reference does not teach that the first layer is colored; however, the published JP reference does teach that the second layer of the laminate can be printed via ink jet and/or the individual layers may contain pigments (see machine translation). The Examiner is of the position that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that depending on desired end use the individual layers of the laminate could be printed and/or contain pigments.
With regard to claims 7 and 14, the published JP reference teach that the laminated sheet of the present invention may be further embossed on the surface (see machine translation).
With regard to claims 8 and 15, the published JP reference teach that the second layer wherein the length weighted average fiber length of the second layer is 0.1 to 8 mm, more preferably 1 to 5 mm (see machine translation).
With regard to the method of claim 9, the published JP reference teach claimed air-laid defibrated fiber method, the claimed mixing step, depositing step and processing via heat/compression step (see machine translation).
With regard to claims 16 and 17, the combination of cited prior art does not expressly teach adjusting the weight of the second layer by adjusting the thickness. The Examiner is of the position that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that depending on desired use application the weight of the second layer can be adjusted by adjusting the thickness. It has been held that, where 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. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA)
With regard to claim 18, the JP reference does teach that fibers of the second layer can be chemically treated (see above), but does not expressly teach the claimed blocked isocyanate crosslinking agent treatment. The Examiner is of the position that depending on desired end use a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the fibers of the second layer could be treated to impart water repellency and/or mechanical strength. https://www.newtopchem.com/archives/67304
Conclusion
4. 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 LYNDA SALVATORE whose telephone number is (571)272-1482. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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.
/LYNDA SALVATORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights