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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Receipt is acknowledged of the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 12/24/2025, 04/16.2025, and 01/10/2025. The Examiner has considered the reference cited therein to the extent that each is a proper citation. Please see attached USPTO form.
Priority
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 parent Application No. JP2022-120964, filed on 07/28/2022.
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 1-3, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oda et. al (US20180251615A1) hereinafter Oda.
Oda teaches a water-soluble film comprising a polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) resin that can be used to package a chemical agent (see Abstract). Oda teaches the PVA film to have a smooth surface or texture processing such as an embossed pattern, a minute uneven pattern, or a special engraved pattern for anti-blocking property, slideability during processing, and reduction in adhesion between products and appearance on one or both sides (see [0103]), which is identical to the texturing process noted in the Applicant’s Specification ([0099]). With regards to claim 1, Oda does not explicitly teach the initial elastic modulus of the film to be 2.5-10 MPa. However, the elastic modulus of Oda’s invented film is necessarily within the range recited in the instant claim because elastic modulus is inherent to the composition and based on the texturing process. A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2112.01 II. Hence, the elastic modulus is inherently taught by Oda, absent of evidence to the contrary.
With regards to claim 2, Oda teaches the water-soluble film to further contain a plasticizer in a proportion of at least 20 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the PVA resin (see [0017]).
With regards to claim 3, Oda teaches the use of an anionic group-modified PVA resin in the PVA resin (see [0029]).
With regards to claims 6 and 8, Oda teaches the water-soluble film to form a package with liquid detergent (see [0068]).
Claims 4-5, 7, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oda (US20180251615A1) as applied to claims 1-3, 6, and 8 above, and further in view of Labeque et. al (US20170298216A1) hereinafter Labeque.
Oda teaches a water-soluble film comprising a polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) resin that can be used to package a chemical agent (see Abstract), as recited above. The PVA in the film includes an anionic group-modified PVA resin and an unmodified PVA (see [0014]). The anionic modified PVA resin is taught to have a 4 wt% aqueous solution viscosity of 10 to 35 mPas at 20 °C (see [0004]). With regards to claims 4-5, Oda fails to explicitly disclose the weight % aqueous solution viscosity of the unmodified PVA resin or the composition breakdown of the PVA in the film.
Labeque teaches a pouch including a water-soluble film, including a PVA resin blend, and a composition (see Abstract). The PVA resin blend further comprises 10-60 wt% of a first PVA polymer with carboxylated anionic monomers and 30-90 wt% of a second PVA polymer with vinyl alcohol monomers (see [0012]). One of the two PVA polymers can be present in a higher wt% as the “main” component in the PVA resin blend. A person of ordinary skill would have optimized the proportions of the PVA polymers for best results. The absolute viscosity difference between the first and second PVA polymer is taught to be in the range of 0-10 cP measured at 4 wt% aqueous solution at 20 °C (see [0104]). Hence, the viscosity of one of the two polymers can be higher than the other.
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Oda’s film with the teachings of Labeque regarding the first and second PVA polymers such that the absolute viscosity difference between the two is 10 cP or less. This modification would have resulted in the benefit of improved cold-water stability and chemical resistance (see [0005]).
With regards to claim 5, Labeque teaches the use of a first carboxylated anionic PVA polymers and a second vinyl alcohol PVA polymer in the PVA resin blend, which are examples of modified PVA (see [0012]). The use of the carboxylated anionic PVA polymer in Oda’s invention modified by the teachings of Labeque would therefore necessarily include a modified PVA resin.
With regards to claim 7, Oda teaches the use of liquid detergent as the active in the water-soluble film (see Abstract). However, Oda does not explicitly disclose the presence of multiple compartments in the film.
Labeque teaches the use of multiple compartments of different sizes and volumes in the pouch (see [0065]-[0068]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Oda’s invention with multiple compartments as taught by Labeque. This modification would provide the additional benefit of physically separating incompatible compositions, such as bleach and enzymes, in the laundry composition and expand the useful life of such ingredients (see [0128]).
With regards to claim 9, Oda teaches a method of forming the package by fixing the bottom portion of the film onto a mold in the bottom of the apparatus while the top was fixed to the upper part, heated for 10 seconds, then vacuum-formed in the mold; the formed film bottom was then filled with liquid detergent and the top and bottom were press-sealed (see [0169]). Oda teaches a substantially similar method to the instant claim of vacuum-forming the film in a mold, filling the formed film with a chemical agent, and then sealing the formed film to another film (in this case the top unformed film). However, Oda fails to disclose the use of two or more water-soluble films in the method and instead relies on separating the top unformed film from the bottom formed film.
Labeque teaches the method of making the packet with more than one PVA film (see [0124]). Labeque also teaches the method of forming a package similar to Oda’s process: using a vacuum to draw the film to a mold, filling with a household care composition (such as laundry detergent), continuously feeding a second film over the bonded film with the chemical agent and sealing the two films closed (see [0181]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to use two sepaarate PVA films as taught by Labeque in Oda’s method of making a package instead of the top and bottom of the same film. The use of multiple PVA films would have the added benefit of having adequate strength and desirable mechanical properties (see [0005]).
With regards to claim 10, Oda teaches the thickness of the PVA film to be between 20-100 μm (see [0100]) and the stretching of the film during film formation (see [0077]). Oda also teaches the PVA film to stretch at a rate of 200 mm/min with an elongation of 8% during the tensile modulus elongation test without heat or vaccum (see [0161]).
Labeque teaches the film to have any suitable thickness in the range of 5-85 μm, noting that the film may be deformed during the making of the pouch (see [0122]). Labeque also teaches the pneumatic stretching and pressuring forming of a film during thermoforming (see [0179]).
Although Labeque and Oda both fail to explicitly disclose the thickness of thinnest portion of the film, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill to reasonably expect the thinnest portion of the film to have a thickness of 35% or less of the water-soluble film before vacuum-forming. It is known in the art that vacuum-forming stretches a film, making it thinner. Given the wide range of thicknesses taught by both Labeque and Oda for the films and the tensile modulus of 8% length elongation of Oda’s invention, a person of ordinary skill would reasonably expect the modified method of making a package based on the teachings of Oda and Labeque to form a film having a thickness of 35% or less of the water-soluble film before vacuum-forming.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHREYA PAUL whose telephone number is (571)272-1551. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30am-5:00pm.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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 infor1mation 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.
/SP/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/ANGELA C BROWN-PETTIGREW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights