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 .
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 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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/06/2024, 05/08/2025 and 07/09/2026 were filed before the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 2, 5 – 8, 10 – 12, 14 and 16 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hiroshi (JP2007244886 A) as cited by Applicant – see attached Machine Translation.
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Hiroshi teaches a nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) comprising: a first outer surface formed in part from a first material layer (Fig. 1) comprising cellulosic fibers (rayon; Paragraph [0004]) and comprising a plurality of elevated regions and a non-elevated interconnecting region disposed between the plurality of elevated regions (valleys and peaks; Paragraph [0004]); a second outer surface opposite the first outer surface and formed in part from a second material layer comprising cellulosic fibers (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]); a third material layer comprising natural fibers (pulp layer; Paragraph [0004]); wherein the third material layer is disposed substantially between the first outer surface and the second outer surface in regions longitudinally adjacent the non-elevated interconnecting region (Paragraph [0007]) ; and wherein at least a portion of the third material layer penetrates at least a portion of the plurality of elevated regions where a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer are singularized and intertwined with the cellulosic fibers of the first material layer (Paragraph [0007]).
Regarding Independent Claim 12, Hiroshi teaches a nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) comprising: a first outer surface formed in part from a first material layer (Fig. 1) comprising cellulosic fibers (rayon; Paragraph [0004]) and comprising a plurality of elevated regions and a non-elevated interconnecting region disposed between the plurality of elevated regions (valleys and peaks; Paragraph [0004]); a second outer surface opposite the first outer surface and formed in part from a second material layer comprising cellulosic fibers (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]); a third material layer comprising natural fibers (pulp layer; Paragraph [0004]); wherein the third material layer is disposed substantially between the first material layer and the second material layer in the non-elevated interconnecting regions (Paragraph [0007]); and wherein at least a portion of the third material layer penetrates the first material layer in at least some of the plurality of elevated regions (Paragraph [0007]).
Regarding Claims 2 and 14, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]) are bonded to one another (Paragraph [0007] – mechanically entangled and integrating the three layers).
Regarding Claim 5, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]) are disposed on the first outer surface (Paragraph [0007]).
Regarding Claim 6, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein the plurality of elevated regions have a greater caliper than the interconnecting region (Paragraph [0004] - the thickness pattern having a lower fiber density in the valleys than in the peaks).
Regarding Claim 7, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein the natural fibers of the third material layer (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]) have an average fiber length of between about 0.5 mm and about 25 mm (Paragraph [0004]).
Regarding Claim 8, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein the natural fibers of the third material layer (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]) comprise pulp fibers (rayon is made from cellulose extracted from wood pulp, thus inherently teaches pulp fibers).
Regarding Claim 10, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein the cellulosic fibers of the first material layer (rayon; Paragraph [0004]) and/or the second material layer (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]) comprise lyocell fibers (lyocell is a type of rayon).
Regarding Claim 11, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein the natural fibers of the third material layer (pulp layer; Paragraph [0004]) have a shorter average fiber length than the cellulosic fibers (Paragraphs [0017] and [0019]) of the first material layer (rayon; Paragraph [0004]) and/or the second material layer (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]).
Regarding Claim 16, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer (pulp layer; Paragraph [0004]) are disposed on the first outer surface Paragraph [0004]).
Regarding Claim 17, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate (Fig. 1) wherein the first plurality of fibers (rayon; Paragraph [0004]) and/or the second plurality of fibers (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]) comprise fibers having a lower fluid retention value than fibers of the third plurality of fibers (pulp layer; Paragraph [0004]), according to the Fluid Retention Value Test Method (rayon with polyethylene terephthalate fibers have a lower fluid retention than the pulp layer).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroshi (JP2007244886 A) as cited by Applicant – see attached Machine Translation in view of Ducker et al. (U. S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0318047 A1).
Regarding Claims 3 and 15, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate of claims 2 and 14, as discussed above.
Hiroshi does not explicitly teach wherein a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer are hydrogen bonded to one another.
Ducker, however, teaches a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer (Paragraph [0039]) are hydrogen bonded to one another (Paragraph [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Hiroshi to further include a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer are hydrogen bonded to one another, as taught by Ducker, to increase the density and strength of the material.
Claims 4, 9, 13 and 18 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroshi (JP2007244886 A) as cited by Applicant – see attached Machine Translation.
Regarding Claim 4, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate of claim 1, as discussed above.
Hiroshi does not explicitly teach at least a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer are not bonded to one another.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Hiroshi to further include at least a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer are not bonded to one another, as claimed, since even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production (MPEP 2113).
Regarding Claim 9, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate wherein the cellulosic fibers of the first material layer (rayon; Paragraph [0004]) and/or the second material layer (also rayon; Paragraph [0004]) comprise fibers having an average fiber length of between about 20 mm and about 80 mm (Paragraph [0004]).
Hiroshi does not explicitly teach carded fibers, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Hiroshi to further include carded fibers, as claimed, since even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production (MPEP 2113).
Regarding Claim 13, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate wherein a portion of the natural fibers of the third material layer (pulp layer; Paragraph [0004]) and intertwined with the cellulosic fibers of the first material layer (Paragraph [0004]).
Hiroshi does not explicitly teach singularized fibers, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Hiroshi to further include singularized fibers, as claimed, since even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production (MPEP 2113).
Regarding Claim 18, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate of claim 12, as discussed above.
Hiroshi inherently teaches a fluid retention value of the fibers as discussed in Paragraph [0001] but does not explicitly recite the values wherein the first plurality of fibers and/or the second plurality of fibers have a fluid retention value of less than 0.95 g/g, less than 0.92 g/g, less than 0.9 g/g, less than 0.85 g/g, or less than 0.8 g/g as measured according to the Fluid Retention Value Test Method.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Hiroshi to further include the first plurality of fibers and/or the second plurality of fibers have a fluid retention value of less than 0.95 g/g, less than 0.92 g/g, less than 0.9 g/g, less than 0.85 g/g, or less than 0.8 g/g as measured according to the Fluid Retention Value Test Method, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the percentage of a component. A change in percentage is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 19, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate of claim 12, as discussed above.
Hiroshi inherently teaches a fluid retention value of the fibers as discussed in Paragraph [0001] but does not explicitly recite the values wherein the third plurality of fibers has a fluid retention value of greater than 0.98 g/g, according to the Fluid Retention Value Test Method.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Hiroshi to further include a fluid retention value of the fibers as discussed in Paragraph [0001] but does not explicitly recite the values wherein the third plurality of fibers has a fluid retention value of greater than 0.98 g/g, according to the Fluid Retention Value Test Method, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the percentage of a component. A change in percentage is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroshi (JP2007244886 A) as cited by Applicant – see attached Machine Translation in view of Marsh et al. (U. S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0370303 A1).
Regarding Claims 20, Hiroshi teaches the nonwoven substrate of claim 12, as discussed above.
Hiroshi does not explicitly teach a wet wipe comprising a lotion comprising: water; a pH buffering system; and a preservative system.
Marsh, however, teaches a wet wipe (Abstract) comprising a lotion comprising: water (Abstract); a pH buffering system (Abstract); and a preservative system (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Hiroshi to further include a wet wipe comprising a lotion comprising: water; a pH buffering system; and a preservative system, as taught by Marsh, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known wipe on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
Art made of record, however, not relied upon for the current rejection is as follows: U. S. Patent No. 6,395,957 B1 to Chen et al. teaches resilient absorbent web for absorbent articles, the dual-zoned web combines the advantages of apertured films and soft, nonwoven cover layers in one structure while still being inherently hydrophilic. The liner comprises a web of wet-resilient, hydrophilic basesheet having a three-dimensional topography comprising elevated regions onto which hydrophobic matter is deposited or printed and a plurality of spaced apart depressed regions. In a preferred embodiment, the hydrophobic matter applied to the elevated regions of the basesheet comprises hydrophobic fibers in a contiguous nonwoven web which has been apertured or provided with slits or other openings, such that the apertures or openings overlay a portion of the depressed regions. The elevated hydrophobic regions enhance dry feel and promote fluid flow toward the lower hydrophilic regions, which comprise the exposed depressed regions of the basesheet. The basesheet is preferably in liquid communication with underlying absorbent material, most preferably a stabilized airlaid cellulosic material or compressed stabilized fluff such that the absorbent material can wick fluid out of the basesheet by capillary action. When soft, hydrophobic fibers are deposited on the elevated regions, the liner also has a soft, cloth-like feel in addition to a dry feel in use.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am to 3:30pm.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights