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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 4 recites the broad recitation “about 1:1.5 or greater”, and the claim also recites “about 1:2.5 or greater” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. In the present instance, claim 8 recites the broad recitation “a density of about twenty embossments per centimeter squared or structured basesheet or greater”, and the claim also recites “twenty-five embossments per centimeter squared or greater”, “about twenty-seven and a half embossments per centimeter squared or greater” which is the narrower statements of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 11, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoshida et al. (USPN 11,363,917).
Yoshida et al. disclose a multi-ply tissue product (Figures; Abstract) comprising: a first ply comprising a structured basesheet having a plurality of embossments disposed thereon (Figure 3, #32); and a second ply (Figure 3), wherein at least a portion of the embossments have a base, a tip, and a height extending from the base to the tip in a Z direction, the base having a first side and an opposed second side, and a third side and opposed fourth side, wherein at least one angle between adjacent sides of the first, second, third, and fourth side is from about forty-five degrees to about one hundred and thirty-five degrees (Column 7, lines 4 – 17; Figures), and wherein the height of the at least a portion of the embossment is about one and one-tenth millimeters or greater (Column 13, lines 14 – 19) as in claim 1. With respect to claim 3, at least a portion of the embossments have two or more height-extending sides having an angle with the Z direction of about two degrees to about thirty degrees such that at least a portion of the embossments have a base width and a tip width, where the tip width is less than the base width (Column 14, line 65 to Column 15, line 3; Column 7, lines 4 – 17; Column 13, lines 36 – 42). Regarding claim 4, at least a portion of the embossments have a ratio of the height to the base width of about 1:1.5 or greater, or about 1:2.5 or greater (Column 13, lines 14 – 19). For claim 7, the height of the at least a portion of the embossments is about one and a quarter millimeters or greater. In claim 9, at least a portion of the embossments have at least one angle between adjacent sides from about seventy-five degrees to about one hundred and five degrees (Column 7, lines 4 – 17; Figures). With regard to claim 11, each of the embossments present on the structured basesheet have at least one angle between adjacent sides from about seventy-five degrees and about one hundred and five degrees, and wherein the height of each embossment is about one and fifteen-hundredths millimeters or greater (Column 13, lines 14 – 19; Column 14, line 65 to Column 15, line 3). As in claim 16, the tissue product has a basis weight of about eighty grams per square meter or less (Column 6, lines 48 – 55). With respect to claim 17, the structured basesheet is formed utilizing a textured forming wire (The recitation that the basesheet is formed by the “utilizing a textured forming wire” is a process recitation in a product. Product claims including process recitations are not limited by the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present instance, the process steps imply that the basesheet is textured. The reference discloses such a product. See Figures; Abstract).
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.
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (USPN 11,363,917) in view of Schulz (WO 96/31652).
Yoshida et al. disclose a multi-ply tissue product (Figures; Abstract) comprising: a first ply comprising a structured basesheet having a plurality of embossments disposed thereon (Figure 3, #32); and a second ply (Figure 3), wherein at least a portion of the embossments have a base, a tip, and a height extending from the base to the tip in a Z direction, the base having a first side and an opposed second side, and a third side and opposed fourth side, wherein at least one angle between adjacent sides of the first, second, third, and fourth side is from about forty-five degrees to about one hundred and thirty-five degrees (Column 7, lines 4 – 17; Figures), and wherein the height of the at least a portion of the embossment is about one and one-tenth millimeters or greater (Column 13, lines 14 – 19). However, Yoshida et al. fails to disclose at least a portion of the embossments have a rounded tip, and at least a portion of the embossments are truncated pyramids having a rounded tip.
Schulz teaches a tissue product (Figures; Abstract) having at least a portion of the embossments have a rounded tip (Figure 5), and at least a portion of the embossments are truncated pyramids having a rounded tip (Figures 6, 9, 10) for the purpose of forming a tissue with improved bulk and puffiness (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have embossments made with truncated pyramids having a rounded tip in Yoshida et al. in order to form a tissue with improved bulk and puffiness as taught by Schulz.
Claims 5, 13 – 15, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (USPN 11,363,917) in view of Vogt et al. (WO 2020/205520 A1).
Yoshida et al. disclose a multi-ply tissue product (Figures; Abstract) comprising: a first ply comprising a structured basesheet having a plurality of embossments disposed thereon (Figure 3, #32); and a second ply (Figure 3), wherein at least a portion of the embossments have a base, a tip, and a height extending from the base to the tip in a Z direction, the base having a first side and an opposed second side, and a third side and opposed fourth side, wherein at least one angle between adjacent sides of the first, second, third, and fourth side is from about forty-five degrees to about one hundred and thirty-five degrees (Column 7, lines 4 – 17; Figures), and wherein the height of the at least a portion of the embossment is about one and one-tenth millimeters or greater (Column 13, lines 14 – 19). However, Yoshida et al. fails to disclose the tissue product has a sheet bulk from about seven cubic centimeters per gram to about eleven cubic centimeters per gram, a third ply disposed between the first and second plies, the second ply comprises a second basesheet having a plurality of second embossments disposed thereon, the third ply comprises a third basesheet having a plurality of third embossments disposed thereon, the second basesheet, the third basesheet, or both the second and third basesheet are structured basesheets, and the tissue product includes four or more plies, wherein the first ply is located on an exterior side of the tissue product.
Vogt et al. teach a multi-ply tissue product (Figures; Abstract), wherein the tissue product has a sheet bulk from about seven cubic centimeters per gram to about eleven cubic centimeters per gram (Page 8, lines 8 – 13), a third ply disposed between the first and second plies (Page 19, lines 7 – 18), the second ply comprises a second basesheet having a plurality of second embossments disposed thereon (Page 19, lines 7 – 18), the third ply comprises a third basesheet having a plurality of third embossments disposed thereon (Page 19, lines 7 – 18), the second basesheet, the third basesheet, or both the second and third basesheet are structured basesheets (Page 19, lines 7 – 18), and the tissue product includes four or more plies, wherein the first ply is located on an exterior side of the tissue product (Page 19, lines 7 – 18) for the purpose of forming a durable, flexible and highly dispersible tissue product (Page 6, lines 17 – 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a multi-ply tissue product with a sheet bulk in Yoshida et al. in order to form a durable, flexible and highly dispersible tissue product as taught by Vogt et al.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (USPN 11,363,917) in view of Vogt et al. (WO 2020/205520 A1) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Vogt et al. (WO 2017/196516 A1).
Yoshida et al., as modified with Vogt et al. (‘520), discloses the claimed invention except for the tissue product has a caliper of at least about two thousand, one hundred micrometers or more per twelve plies, and the first structured basesheet, second structured basesheet, third structured basesheet, or a combination thereof, have a thickness of about one hundred and fifty micrometers or more prior to embossment.
Vogt et al. (‘516) teach a multi-ply tissue product (Figures; Abstract; Page 4, lines 13 - 15), wherein the tissue product has a caliper of at least about two thousand, one hundred micrometers or more per twelve plies (Page 6, lines 15 – 24), and the first structured basesheet, second structured basesheet, third structured basesheet, or a combination thereof, have a thickness of about one hundred and fifty micrometers or more prior to embossment (Page 6, lines 15 – 24) for the purpose of having a tissue product with visually distinct design elements (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a multi-ply tissue product with the desired thickness in the modified Yoshida et al. in order to have a tissue product with visually distinct design elements as taught by Vogt et al. (‘516).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (USPN 11,363,917) in view of Satake et al. (WO 2020/068839 A1).
Yoshida et al. disclose a multi-ply tissue product (Figures; Abstract) comprising: a first ply comprising a structured basesheet having a plurality of embossments disposed thereon (Figure 3, #32); and a second ply (Figure 3), wherein at least a portion of the embossments have a base, a tip, and a height extending from the base to the tip in a Z direction, the base having a first side and an opposed second side, and a third side and opposed fourth side, wherein at least one angle between adjacent sides of the first, second, third, and fourth side is from about forty-five degrees to about one hundred and thirty-five degrees (Column 7, lines 4 – 17; Figures), and wherein the height of the at least a portion of the embossment is about one and one-tenth millimeters or greater (Column 13, lines 14 – 19). However, Yoshida et al. fails to disclose a number of embossments to yield a density of about twenty embossments per centimeter squared or structured basesheet or greater, about twenty-five embossments per centimeter squared or greater, or about twenty-seven and a half embossments per centimeter squared or greater.
Satake et al. teach a multi-ply tissue product (Figures; Abstract) having a number of embossments to yield a density of about twenty embossments per centimeter squared or structured basesheet or greater, about twenty-five embossments per centimeter squared or greater, or about twenty-seven and a half embossments per centimeter squared or greater (Page 13, lines 5 – 11) for the purpose of forming cushion elements in the tissue product (Page 12, lines 29 – 33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a density of embossments in Yoshida et al. in order to form cushion elements in the tissue product as taught by Satake et al.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (USPN 11,363,917) in view of Barnholtz et al. (USPGPub 2019/0063003 A1).
Yoshida et al. disclose a multi-ply tissue product (Figures; Abstract) comprising: a first ply comprising a structured basesheet having a plurality of embossments disposed thereon (Figure 3, #32); and a second ply (Figure 3), wherein at least a portion of the embossments have a base, a tip, and a height extending from the base to the tip in a Z direction, the base having a first side and an opposed second side, and a third side and opposed fourth side, wherein at least one angle between adjacent sides of the first, second, third, and fourth side is from about forty-five degrees to about one hundred and thirty-five degrees (Column 7, lines 4 – 17; Figures), and wherein the height of the at least a portion of the embossment is about one and one-tenth millimeters or greater (Column 13, lines 14 – 19). However, Yoshida et al. fails to disclose the tissue product has a TS7 softness of about fifty or greater.
Barnholtz et al. teach a multi-ply product (Abstract) having tissue product has a TS7 softness of about fifty or greater (Columns 21 and 22, Table 1) for the purpose of having a product that can be used for scrubbing (Paragraph 0022).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a TS7 softness of about fifty or greater in Yoshida et al. in order to have a product that can be used for scrubbing as taught by Barnholtz et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patricia L Nordmeyer whose telephone number is (571)272-1496. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6:30pm EST, Monday - Friday.
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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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.
/Patricia L. Nordmeyer/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1788
/pln/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 September 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights