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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 6/22/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 16-21 are withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to a nonelected invention.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 6/22/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by USPAP 2017/0175313 to Song or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over USPAP 2017/0175313 to Song in view of USPAP 2022/0364281 to Ramaratnam and/or USPAP 2019/0161897 to Mecl.
Claim 1, Song discloses a nonwoven fabric comprising at least one nonwoven web of filaments, wherein the nonwoven fabric has an embossing pattern consisting of a plurality of embossments that each have an embossing area of 0.05 to 0.3 mm2 (see entire document including [0002], [0045] and [0046]).
Claim 2, Song discloses that the smallest spacing between two embossments of the embossing pattern is to be 0.25 to 2 mm [0011]. In addition, Mecl discloses that it is known in the art to space embossments by 0.5 to 2.5 mm and that an embossment arrangement significantly influences the final properties of an embossed nonwoven fabric (see entire document including [0002] and [0098]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to space the embossments by the claimed amount, because it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select embossment spacing on the basis of suitability and desired nonwoven fabric characteristics.
Claim 3, the proportion of the total embossing area of the embossing pattern to the total surface area of the nonwoven web is 2 to 12% [0009].
Claim 4, the embossments in plan view each have at least one geometry selected from the group: “punctuate or circular, elliptical, square, rectangular, diamond-shaped, polygonal, linear, wavy” ([0010] and [0037])
Claim 5, the aspect ratio of the embossing area of each embossments may be less than 4 (the Figures, [0010] and [0037]).
Claim 6, the filaments of the at least one nonwoven web are crimped and continuous multicomponent or bicomponent filaments ([0031] and [0038]).
Claim 7, the multicomponent filaments or bicomponent filaments each have a first component that substantially consists of at least one thermoplastic polyolefin material or the multicomponent filaments or bicomponent filaments each have a second or further component that substantially consists of at least one thermoplastic material ([0038] and [0053]).
Claim 8, the multicomponent filaments or bicomponent filaments are of side-by-side configuration or core-sheath configuration ([0038] and [0053]).
Claim 9, Song does not appear to specifically mention the nonwoven fabric weight but Ramaratnam and Mecl discloses that it is known in the art to construct a nonwoven fabric with a mass per unit area of less than 200 g/m2 (Table 2 of Ramaratnam and [0025] of Mecl). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the nonwoven fabric with any suitable weight, such as claimed, because it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a nonwoven fabric weight on the basis of its suitability and desired characteristics.
Claim 10, Song does not appear to specifically mention the nonwoven fabric thickness but Ramaratnam discloses that it is known in the art to construct a nonwoven fabric with a thickness of 0.1 to 0.85 mm. (Table 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the nonwoven fabric with any suitable thickness, such as claimed, because it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a nonwoven fabric thickness on the basis of its suitability and desired characteristics.
Claim 11, Song does not appear to specifically mention the nonwoven fabric abrasion resistance or stiffness but Song does disclose that abrasion resistance may be varied as desired ([0003]-[[0005]). The examiner takes official notice that the claimed abrasion resistance and stiffness are common in the art. In addition, Mecl discloses that abrasion resistance may be varied as desired [0191] and Ramaratnam discloses that Martindale abrasion resistance and stiffness may be varied as desired ([0190] and [0196]-[0204]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the nonwoven fabric with any suitable abrasion resistance and stiffness, such as claimed, because it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select an abrasion resistance and stiffness on the basis of the intended use and the desired/required properties.
Claim 12, Song does not appear to specifically mention the nonwoven fabric MD strength but Ramaratnam discloses that it is known in the art to construct a nonwoven fabric with a MD strength of at least 8 N/5 cm (Table 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the nonwoven fabric with any suitable MD strength, such as claimed, because it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a nonwoven fabric thickness on the basis of its suitability and desired characteristics
Claim 13, Song does not appear to specifically mention the nonwoven fabric embossment depth but Mecl discloses that it is known in the art to construct a nonwoven fabric with a depth of the 0.1 to 0.8 mm ([0072] of Mecl). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the nonwoven fabric with any suitable embossment depth, such as claimed, because it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a nonwoven fabric embossment depth on the basis of its suitability and desired characteristics.
Claim 14, the nonwoven fabric is a nonwoven laminate composed of at least two nonwoven webs or nonwoven fabric layers [0012].
Claim 15, the nonwoven fabric is consolidated with at least one calender roller for making the embossing pattern [0013].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW T PIZIALI whose telephone number is (571)272-1541. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7am-5pm.
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.
/ANDREW T PIZIALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights