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 4-6, 14, and 18-21 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.
Regarding claims 4-6, 14, and 18-21, the claims recite various properties “at least about” claimed ranges. Claims reciting "at least about" are invalid for indefiniteness where there is nothing in the specification, prosecution history, or the prior art to provide any indication as to what range of specific activity is covered by the term “about.”
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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Pub. No. 2023/0046170 to Pourdeyhimi.
Regarding claims 1-21, Pourdeyhimi teaches a nonwoven fabric including greater than 50% by weight of a majority polymer component, based on total weight of the fabric, and a minority polymer component, wherein there is a difference of at least 10ºC or at least 20ºC in melting point between the majority polymer component and the minority polymer component (Pourdeyhimi, Abstract, claims 1-18). Pourdeyhimi teaches that the fabric is arranged in layers with a first layer, a second layer, and a mid-layer positioned between the first layer and the second layer, wherein the top layer and the bottom layer comprise a plurality of bicomponent fibers comprising both the majority polymer component and the minority polymer component, and the mid-layer comprises monocomponent fibers constructed from either the majority polymer component or the minority polymer component (Id.). Pourdeyhimi teaches that the bicomponent fiber types include sheath/core structures and side-by-side cross-sections (Id., paragraphs 0059, 0077). Pourdeyhimi teaches that the fabrics include a plurality of fiber types, wherein each fiber type may be a single monocomponent or bicomponent filaments or may be a plurality of monocomponent filaments, bicomponent filaments, or mixtures of monocomponent and bicomponent filaments (Id., paragraph 0077). Pourdeyhimi teaches that the fibers can include one or more thermoplastic polymers (Id., paragraphs 0066-0071), including examples with polylactic acid, polypropylene, polyester, and polyethylene (Id., paragraphs 0096-0102).
In the event it is shown that Pourdeyhimi does not disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity, the invention is obvious because Pourdeyhimi discloses the claimed constituents and discloses that they may be used alternatively or in combination.
Regarding claim 3, as set forth above, Pourdeyhimi teaches various thermoplastic polymers suitable for the fibers. Pourdeyhimi teaches combinations of majority and minority polymer material, including using similar minority polymer materials with different majority polymer materials (Pourdeyhimi, paragraphs 0098-0102). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the nonwoven of Pourdeyhimi, wherein the majority polymer in the bicomponent filaments and monocomponent filaments comprise different polymers, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional nonwoven comprising polymer components known in the art as being functionally equivalent and predictably suitable based on the totality of the teachings of Pourdeyhimi.
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Pourdeyhimi teaches that the majority polymer component is present in an amount of 50 to about 90% by weight, and that the minority component is present in an amount of about 10 to 49% by weight (Pourdeyhimi, paragraph 0009). Pourdeyhimi teaches exemplary nonwoven fabrics having a top and bottom layer of bicomponent filaments, and a mid-layer of monocomponent filaments (Id., paragraphs 0094-0103). Pourdeyhimi teaches and suggests that the bicomponent filaments have basis weights between 15 gsm and 45 gsm (Id., Table 6). Pourdeyhimi teaches that the fabric has a basis weight of about 5 g/m2 to about 250 g/m2, such as about 10 g/m2 to about 50 g/m2 (Id., paragraph 0011).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the nonwoven of Pourdeyhimi, and adjusting and varying the amounts of bicomponent and monocomponent fibers, such as within the claimed ranges, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional nonwoven based on the totality of the teachings of Pourdeyhimi.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Pourdeyhimi teaches layered configurations including alternating layer arrangements wherein monocomponent fibers are present in all of the layers (Pourdeyhimi, paragraph 0079, Figs. 4-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the nonwoven of Pourdeyhimi, wherein the nonwoven comprises a layered structure and composition as claimed, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional nonwoven based on the totality of the teachings of Pourdeyhimi.
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Pourdeyhimi teaches sheath-core bicomponent fibers having a higher melting point material core (Pourdeyhimi, paragraph 0079).
Regarding claims 14 and 20, as set forth above, Pourdeyhimi teaches a nonwoven fabric including greater than 50% by weight of a majority polymer component, based on total weight of the fabric. Pourdeyhimi teaches samples using polymer combinations in various polymer weight ratios which are within the claimed range (Pourdeyhimi, paragraphs 0098-0103).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, Pourdeyhimi teaches that nonwoven fabrics are widely used as absorbent products and filtration devices, including a nonwoven suitable for use as filtration (Pourdeyhimi, paragraphs 0002, 0007). Note that a preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead, the structural limitations are able to stand alone. See In re Hirao, 535 F.2d 67, 190 USPQ 15 (CCPA 1976) and Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478, 481 (CCPA 1951).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER Y CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-6730. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/PETER Y CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights