DETAILED ACTION
Note: The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
1. Claims 1-7 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability.
Claim 8 is preliminarily canceled as of the December 5, 2024 claim amendment.
Priority
2. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The listing of references in the PCT international search report is not considered to be an information disclosure statement (IDS) complying with 37 CFR 1.98. 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2) requires a legible copy of: (1) each foreign patent; (2) each publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; (3) for each cited pending U.S. application, the application specification including claims, and any drawing of the application, or that portion of the application which caused it to be listed including any claims directed to that portion, unless the cited pending U.S. application is stored in the Image File Wrapper (IFW) system; and (4) all other information, or that portion which caused it to be listed. In addition, each IDS must include a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office (see 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1) and (b)), and MPEP § 609.04(a), subsection I. states, “the list ... must be submitted on a separate paper.” Therefore, the references cited in the international search report have not been considered. Applicant is advised that the date of submission of any item of information in the international search report will be the date of submission of the IDS for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements for the IDS with 37 CFR 1.97, including all timing statement requirements of 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Claim Objections
4. Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 2-3, claim 6 recites: “…or each of the stripe projections is constituted by longitudinally discontinuous stripe projections.” However, while “the stripe projections” lack antecedent basis, it is clear that applicant intended to recite ---the stripe protrusions--- which are provided antecedent basis in claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
5. Claim(s) 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katsuhiro et al. (JP 2011-208302 A) in view of Jiao et al. (CN 210612363 U).
6. With regard to claim 1, Katsuhiro discloses a non-woven fabric (non-woven fabric sheet, 1; abstract; Figs. 1, 2), having a surface provided with a plurality of stripe protrusions (plurality of ridges, 2) each extending longitudinally on the non-woven fabric (1) and are arranged in a plurality of columns along a widthwise direction of the non-woven fabric (1; “extending in parallel in the width direction CD”; [0017]); each of the stripe protrusions (2) has a protruding height of 0.5-3.0 mm (“preferably 0.1 to 5 mm, more preferably 0.3 to 3 mm”; [0023]); and at least one opening region (valley portions, 3) comprising a plurality of openings (through-holes, 6) is at least provided between every two adjacent stripe protrusions ([0021]).
However, while Katsuhiro discloses utilizing a forming plate (41) to form the non-woven fabric (1), wherein the plate (41) includes a plurality of holes (44) having a diameter of 0.2 to 1 mm ([0048]), Katsuhiro fails to explicitly disclose an average aperture size of each of the openings of each opening region being less than 20mm2.
Within the same field of endeavor, namely absorbent articles, Jiao discloses a multi-layer composite guide layer structure used for diapers (abstract; [0008-0048]; Fig. 1), comprising a non-woven fabric (1), having a surface provided with a plurality of stripe protrusions (raised portions between plurality of guide grooves, 4) each extending longitudinally on the non-woven fabric (1); and at least one opening region (4) comprising a plurality of openings (pressure holes, 6) is at least provided between every two adjacent stripe protrusions; wherein an average aperture size of each of the openings of each opening region is less than 20mm2 (diameter of 6 being 1-3 mm, which can be calculated to have an area less than 20mm2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the average aperture size of each of the openings disclosed by Katsuhiro to be less than 20mm2, similar to that disclosed by Jiao, in order to make the liquid along the fast longitudinal diffusion, not liquid concentration infiltration occurs in a local position so that the absorbent core can fully exert the washing effect, prolong the service life of the terminal product, as suggested by Jiao in paragraph [0023]. Further, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
7. With regard to claim 2, Katsuhiro discloses that the non-woven fabric (1) is a composite non-woven fabric consisting of a surface layer (A) and a bottom layer (B; Figs. 1-3; abstract; [0017]).
8. With regard to claim 3, Katsuhiro discloses that the plurality of stripe protrusions (2) are formed on the surface layer (A; Figs. 1, 3).
9. With regard to claim 4, Katsuhiro discloses that each opening region (3) also comprises a plurality of projections (non-hole portion of 3 spanning between through-holes, 6; Figs. 1-3).
10. With regard to claim 5, Katsuhiro discloses that the non-woven fabric (1) is one or a combination of hot air through non-woven fabric ([0068]) or hot rolled non-woven fabric ([0071]).
11. With regard to claim 6, Katsuhiro discloses that each of the stripe protrusions (2) us a longitudinally continuous stripe protrusion ([0017]; Figs. 1-3).
12. With regard to claim 7, Katsuhiro discloses that each of the stripe protrusions (2) is solid (Figs. 1-3; [0021-0025]).
Conclusion
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wada et al. (US 6,436,081) discloses an absorbent article with surface structure.
Sato et al. (US PGPUB 2012/0226250) discloses an absorbent article.
Yamaguchi et al. (US PGPUB 2013/0158497) discloses a non-woven sheet and absorbent article.
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J MENSH whose telephone number is (571)270-1594. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 a.m. - 6 p.m..
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.
/ANDREW J MENSH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights