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 .
Claims 1-25 are pending in the instant application and are examined on the merits herein.
Priority
The instant application claims priority to U.S. Provisional App. no. 63/610,108 filed on 12/14/2023.
Claims 1-25 receive priority to the prior-filed application, filed on 12/14/2023.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is less than 50 words and contains phrases which can be implied (i.e. “[t]he present disclosure relates to”). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The use of the term Quick-Freeze (pg. 43), which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 5, 15, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the first frangible pathway” in ln. 1. This should read “wherein the first frangible pathway”.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “wherein the between the proximal terminus” in ln. 1. This should read “wherein the proximal terminus”.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “wherein frangible pathway comprises: a distal segment extending through distal region” in ln. 21. This should read “wherein the frangible pathway comprises: a distal segment extending through the distal region”.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “wherein the third average peak tensile strengths are” in ln. 1. This should read “wherein the third average peak tensile strength is”.
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 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.
PNG
media_image1.png
1062
1336
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ex. Fig. 1 of Nakaoka Fig. 1-2
Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP/2005/287982 A to Nakaoka in view of US/2017/0105883 A1 to Nishikawa.
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Nakaoka discloses
(Claim 1) an absorbent article (Fig. 1, absorbent article 1A) comprising:
a first belt comprising an inner wearer facing surface and an outer garment facing surface, the first belt further comprising a laterally extending inner edge and a laterally extending outer edge, the outer edge positioned longitudinally outward of the inner edge (Ex. Fig. 1, first belt P; para. 0034-0035);
a second belt, wherein laterally opposing end portions of the second belt are connected with laterally opposing end portions of the first belt at a first side seam and a second side seam to form a waist opening (Ex. Fig. 1, back belt Q connected to first belt P at seals 2a; para. 0036; para. 0038; para. 0048);
a chassis comprising a topsheet, a backsheet, and an absorbent core positioned between the topsheet and the backsheet (Fig. 3, chassis 3 comprising topsheet 4, backsheet 5, and absorbent core 6), the chassis comprising a longitudinally extending first side edge and a longitudinally extending second side edge laterally separated from the first side edge by a first end edge and a second end edge longitudinally separated from the first end edge, and wherein longitudinally opposing end regions of the chassis are connected with the first belt and the second belt (Ex. Fig. 1, front part 3a and rear part 3b; para. 0037);
wherein a portion of the chassis overlaps the inner wearer facing surface of the first belt to define a chassis overlap region (Ex. Fig. 1; Fig. 3; para. 0037); and
a frangible pathway in the first belt extending between a proximal terminus and a distal terminus (Ex. Fig. 1, frangible pathway considered perforated portions 22 making up first and second tear zones and completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Nakaoka differs from the instantly claimed invention in that Nakaoka fails to disclose
(Claim 1) wherein the frangible pathway comprises an average peak tensile strength of greater than about 60N according to an Average Peak Tensile Strength Test Method herein; and
(Claim 14) wherein the frangible pathway comprises an average peak tensile strength of greater than about 70N.
Nishikawa teaches an absorbent article (Fig. 15, absorbent article 20) comprising a frangible pathway (Fig. 15, frangible pathway 132; para. 0156-0157).
Nishikawa further teaches that the tensile strength of a frangible pathway needs to be optimized to ensure that the “plurality of perforations…are sufficiently strong to resist forces during use, such that the pant article may be taken from the package of articles in closed form, donned by the wearer or caretaker, and worn by the wearer without ripping or tearing or otherwise losing the fit integrity the article is meant to have as an intact closed form pant” and that the perforations beyond where the user applies an opening force open in sequence as one continuous motion (para. 0161-0165). Further, it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the Nakaoka device to have an average peak tensile strength within the claimed range, as it involves only adjusting the properties of a component disclosed to require adjustment. Therefore, 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 device of Nakaoka such that the frangible pathway comprises an average peak tensile strength of greater than about 60 N or 70 N as a matter of routine optimization since 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." See MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Further, it is the Office’s position that the testing method for a material or structural property does not impart a patentable weight. The property is attributed to the material and structure, not the testing method. As such, a reference does not need to recite using the Average Peak Tensile Strength Test Method to determine the average peak tensile strength of the frangible pathway to read on the claim language.
Regarding claim 2, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 1. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the frangible pathway further comprises an accessibility opening in the first belt (Ex. Fig. 1, frangible pathway considered perforated portions 22 making up first and second tear zones and completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Regarding claim 3, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 2. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the first frangible pathway comprises a first tear zone extending between the accessibility opening and one of the distal terminus and the proximal terminus (Ex. Fig. 1, frangible pathway considered perforated portions 22 making up first and second tear zones and completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Regarding claim 4, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 2. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the first frangible pathway comprises a second tear zone extending between the accessibility opening and another one of the distal terminus and the proximal terminus (Ex. Fig. 1, frangible pathway considered perforated portions 22 making up first and second tear zones and completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Regarding claim 5, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 2. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the proximal terminus is on the inner edge of the first belt and the distal terminus is on the outer edge of the first belt (Ex. Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 2. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the accessibility opening is positioned in the overlap region (Ex. Fig. 1; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 2. Nakaoka further discloses a fastener component positioned between the inner wearer facing surface of the first belt and the backsheet (Ex. Fig. 1, fastener components 25/26; Fig. 3; para. 0043).
Regarding claims 8-9, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 7; however, the combination of the prior art differs from the instantly claimed invention in that the prior art fails to disclose
(Claim 8) wherein the accessibility opening extends through the fastener component; and
(Claim 9) wherein the frangible pathway extends across a portion of the fastener component.
Nishikawa teaches an absorbent article (Fig. 15, absorbent article 20) comprising a frangible pathway (Fig. 15, frangible pathway 132; para. 0156-0157),
(Claim 8) wherein openings of the frangible pathway extend through the fastener component (Fig. 15, frangible pathway 132 extending through fastener components 170; para. 0159-0160); and
(Claim 9) wherein the frangible pathway extends across a portion of the fastener component (Fig. 15, frangible pathway 132 extending across fastener components 170; para. 0159-0160); and
wherein the configuration of the fastener components about the frangible pathway ensures that an adequate bond is made between the belt and the chassis (para. 0159-0160).
It would be considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the accessibility opening of the frangible pathway, as a larger completely cut opening of the frangible pathway, of Nakaoka to extend through and across the fastener component as taught by Nishikawa, because Nishikawa teaches that this configuration of the fastener components about the frangible pathway ensures that an adequate bond is made between the belt and the chassis (para. 0159-0160).
Regarding claim 10, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 2. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the accessibility opening comprises a slit in the first belt (Ex. Fig. 1, frangible pathway considered perforated portions 22 making up first and second tear zones and completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Regarding claim 11, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 1. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the frangible pathway comprises lines of weakness (Ex. Fig. 1, frangible pathway considered perforated portions 22 making up first and second tear zones and completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Regarding claim 12, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 1. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the first belt further comprises elastic strands sandwiched between two layers of substrates (Fig. 3, first belt P comprising elastics 13/14 between substrates 11/12; para. 0075-0077).
Regarding claim 13, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 12. Nakaoka further discloses wherein a plurality of the elastic strands are severed at the frangible pathway (Fig. 3, elastics 13/14 ended at frangible pathway 21/22; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Regarding claims 15-18, Nakaoka discloses
(Claim 15) an absorbent article (Fig. 1, absorbent article 1A) comprising:
a first belt comprising an inner wearer facing surface and an outer garment facing surface, the first belt further comprising a laterally extending inner edge and a laterally extending outer edge, the outer edge positioned longitudinally outward of the inner edge (Ex. Fig. 1, first belt P; para. 0034-0035);
a second belt, wherein laterally opposing end portions of the second belt are connected with laterally opposing end portions of the first belt at a first side seam and a second side seam to form a waist opening (Ex. Fig. 1, back belt Q connected to first belt P at seals 2a; para. 0036; para. 0038; para. 0048);
a chassis comprising a topsheet, a backsheet, and an absorbent core positioned between the topsheet and the backsheet (Fig. 3, chassis 3 comprising topsheet 4, backsheet 5, and absorbent core 6), the chassis comprising a longitudinally extending first side edge and a longitudinally extending second side edge laterally separated from the first side edge by a first end edge and a second end edge longitudinally separated from the first end edge, and wherein longitudinally opposing end regions of the chassis are connected with the first belt and the second belt (Ex. Fig. 1, front part 3a and rear part 3b; para. 0037);
wherein a portion of the chassis overlaps the inner wearer facing surface of the first belt to define a chassis overlap region (Ex. Fig. 1; Fig. 3; para. 0037); and
a frangible pathway in the first belt extending between a proximal terminus and a distal terminus (Ex. Fig. 1, frangible pathway considered perforated portions 22 making up first and second tear zones and completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
wherein the first belt comprises: a distal region extending longitudinally inward from the outer edge; a proximal region extending longitudinally outward from the inner edge; and a mid-region positioned longitudinally between the distal region and the proximal region (Ex. Fig. 1);
wherein the frangible pathway comprises:
a distal segment extending through the distal region of the first belt (Ex. Fig. 1, distal segment considered second tear zone to distal terminus);
a proximal segment extending through the proximal region of the first belt (Ex. Fig. 1, proximal segment considered first tear zone to proximal terminus); and
a mid-segment extending through the mid-region of the first belt (Ex. Fig. 1, mid-segment considered completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21 and first perforation 22 extending toward both distal and proximal termini);
wherein the distal segment of the frangible pathway comprises a first average peak tensile strength; the proximal segment of the frangible pathway comprises a second average peak tensile strength; and the mid-segment of the frangible pathway comprises a third average peak tensile strength (Ex. Fig. 1, all sections considered to comprise an average tear strength as all sections comprise separable perforations 22; para. 0034; para. 0050-0051).
Nakaoka differs from the instantly claimed invention in that Nakaoka fails to disclose
(Claim 15) wherein the third average peak tensile strength is greater than the first average peak tensile strength and the second average peak tensile strength according to an Average Peak Tensile Strength Test Method herein;
(Claim 16) wherein the second average peak tensile strength is greater than the first average peak tensile strength;
(Claim 17) wherein the first, second, and third average peak tensile strengths are greater than about 60 N; and
(Claim 18) wherein the third average peak tensile strengths are greater than about 70 N.
Nishikawa teaches an absorbent article (Fig. 15, absorbent article 20) comprising a frangible pathway (Fig. 15, frangible pathway 132; para. 0156-0157).
Nishikawa further teaches that the tensile strength of a frangible pathway needs to be optimized to ensures that the “plurality of perforations…are sufficiently strong to resist forces during use, such that the pant article may be taken from the package of articles in closed form, donned by the wearer or caretaker, and worn by the wearer without ripping or tearing or otherwise losing the fit integrity the article is meant to have as an intact closed form pant” and that the perforations beyond where the user applies an opening force open in sequence as one continuous motion (para. 0161-0165). Further, it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the Nakaoka device to have an average peak tensile strength within the claimed range or claimed arrangement, as it involves only adjusting the properties of a component disclosed to require adjustment. Therefore, 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 device of Nakaoka such that the third average peak tensile strength is greater than the first average peak tensile strength and the second average peak tensile strength, the second average peak tensile strength is greater than the first average peak tensile strength, and the frangible pathway comprises first, second, and third peak tensile strengths of greater than about 60 N or 70 N as a matter of routine optimization since 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." See MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Further, it is the Office’s position that the testing method for a material or structural property does not impart a patentable weight. The property is attributed to the material and structure, not the testing method. As such, a reference does not need to recite using the Average Peak Tensile Strength Test Method to determine the average peak tensile strength of the frangible pathway to read on the claim language.
Regarding claim 19, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 15. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the frangible pathway further comprises an accessibility opening in the first belt positioned in the mid-region (Ex. Fig. 1, mid-segment considered completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21 and first perforation 22 extending toward both distal and proximal terminals; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Regarding claim 20, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 19. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the first frangible pathway comprises a first tear zone extending between the accessibility opening and the distal terminus and a second tear zone extending between the accessibility opening and the proximal terminus (Ex. Fig. 1, frangible pathway considered perforated portions 22 making up first and second tear zones and completely cut portion/accessibility opening 21; para. 0034; para. 0039-0040).
Regarding claim 21, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 19. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the accessibility opening is positioned in the overlap region (Ex. Fig. 1; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 22, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 19. Nakaoka further discloses a fastener component positioned between the inner wearer facing surface of the first belt and the backsheet (Ex. Fig. 1, fastener components 25/26; Fig. 3; para. 0043).
Regarding claims 23-24, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 22; however, the combination of the prior art differs from the instant invention in that the prior art fails to disclose
(Claim 23) wherein the accessibility opening extends through the fastener component; and
(Claim 24) wherein the frangible pathway extends across a portion of the fastener component.
Nishikawa teaches an absorbent article (Fig. 15, absorbent article 20) comprising a frangible pathway (Fig. 15, frangible pathway 132; para. 0156-0157),
(Claim 23) wherein openings of the frangible pathway extend through the fastener component (Fig. 15, frangible pathway 132 extending through fastener components 170; para. 0159-0160); and
(Claim 24) wherein the frangible pathway extends across a portion of the fastener component (Fig. 15, frangible pathway 132 extending across fastener components 170; para. 0159-0160); and
wherein the configuration of the fastener components about the frangible pathway ensures that an adequate bond is made between the belt and the chassis (para. 0159-0160).
It would be considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the accessibility opening of the frangible pathway, as a larger completely cut portion of the frangible pathway, of Nakaoka to extend through and across the fastener component as taught by Nishikawa, because Nishikawa teaches that this configuration of the fastener components about the frangible pathway ensures that an adequate bond is made between the belt and the chassis (para. 0159-0160).
Regarding claim 25, the cited prior art suggests the invention of claim 15. Nakaoka further discloses wherein the distal region comprises a region of the first belt that extends longitudinally inward from the outer edge; the proximal region comprises a region of the first belt that extends longitudinally outward from the inner edge; and wherein the first belt comprises a lateral centerline, and the mid-region comprises a region of the first belt that extends longitudinally outward from the lateral centerline and extends longitudinally inward from the lateral centerline (Ex. Fig. 1).
The prior art differs from the instantly claimed invention in that the prior art fail to explicitly disclose wherein the distal region comprises a region of the first belt that extends 25mm longitudinally inward from the outer edge; the proximal region comprises a region of the first belt that extends 25mm longitudinally outward from the inner edge; and wherein the first belt comprises a lateral centerline, and the mid-region comprises a region of the first belt that extends 12.5mm longitudinally outward from the lateral centerline and extends 12.5mm longitudinally inward from the lateral centerline.
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 device of the prior art to have the distal region comprises a region of the first belt that extends 25mm longitudinally inward from the outer edge; the proximal region comprises a region of the first belt that extends 25mm longitudinally outward from the inner edge; and wherein the first belt comprises a lateral centerline, and the mid-region comprises a region of the first belt that extends 12.5mm longitudinally outward from the lateral centerline and extends 12.5mm longitudinally inward from the lateral centerline since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of the prior art would not operate differently with the claimed dimensions and since Nakaoka discloses different designs of the frangible pathways the device would function appropriately having the claimed dimensions. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the dimensions claimed, indicating simply that the dimensions “may” be the claimed values (specification pg. 38).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US/2005/0192553 A1 to Hasler and US/2003/0130641 A1 to Richlen both disclose absorbent articles comprising lines of weakness.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Linnae Raymond whose telephone number is (571)272-6894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am to 4:00pm.
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.
/Linnae E. Raymond/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/LESLIE R DEAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799 20 July 2026
Prosecution Insights