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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
Therefore, the limitations “first edge” and a “second edge” as recited in claim 21 line 5 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Similar issue in claim 29. No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, the limitations “first side” and a “second side” as recited in claim 21 lines 8 and 9 respectively, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Similar issue in claim 29. No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, the limitations “wherein the first side of each wipe is connected to at least one other first side of another wipe in the stack via a connector, and the second side of each wipe is detached from any other wipe in the stack” as recited in claim 21 lines 10-11, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, the limitations “wherein the orifice of the dispenser container is positioned closer to the first side of the stack of wipes than the second side of the stack of wipes” as recited in claim 27 lines 1-2 respectively, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, the limitations “wherein the orifice is offset toward the first side by at least 25% of a transverse width of the stack” as recited in claim 2 lines 1-2 respectively, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, the limitations “first connection” and a “second connection” as recited in claim 29 lines 8 and 9 respectively, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, the limitations “first longitudinal side” and a “second longitudinal side” as recited in claim 35 line 2 respectively, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, the limitations “first corner” and a “second corner” as recited in claim 35 line 5 and 6 respectively, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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)(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 21,22,35 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Muckenfuhs (US 5,332,118).
Referring to claims 21 and 35. Muckenfuhs discloses a system for dispensing wipes (Figure 8), the system comprising:
a dispenser container (C; Figure 8);
an orifice (A; Figure 8) of the dispenser container; and
a plurality of interconnected wipes (10A; Figure 9) forming a stack within the dispenser container (see stack in pack S; Figure 8);
wherein each wipe (610; as shown in Figure 15) has a first edge (top edge of sheet 610A as shown in Figure 15), a second edge (bottom edge of sheet 610A as shown in Figure 15) parallel to the first edge, a longitudinal direction (direction extending the length of the center line as shown in Figure 15) extending parallel to the right and left edges, a transverse direction perpendicular (direction extending perpendicular to the length of the center line as shown in Figure 15) to the longitudinal direction, and a longitudinal centerline extending in the longitudinal direction and positioned midway between the right and left edges (see Figure 15), and each wipe (610) having a first side transversely (top side portion of 610A) between the centerline and the first edge and having a second side (bottom side portion of 610A) transversely between the centerline and the second edge; and
wherein the first side (top side portion of 610A) of each wipe (610) is connected to at least one other first side (top side portion of 610B) of another wipe (610B) in the stack via a connector (680), and the second side of each wipe (bottom side portion of 610A) is detached from any other wipe in the stack (see Figures 15 wherein wipe 610A and 610B are separated by edge 640).
Referring to claims 22 and 36. Muckenfuhs discloses a system for dispensing wipes (Figure 8), the system comprising:
wherein the plurality of interconnected wipes (610) of the stack (see stack in pack S; Figure 8) are folded in an accordion style (see Figure 8), and wherein each wipe (610) in the stack has a transverse centerline (center line of as shown in Figure 15), and each wipe (610) is folded in the longitudinal direction to have each connector proximal to the transverse centerline (see fold lines in Figure 15).
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by (DE 20314147 U).
Referring to claim 29. DE 20314147 U discloses a stack of interconnected wipes (Figure 1b) comprising:
a first wipe (left most wipe 3), a second wipe (middle wipe 3), and a third wipe (right most wipe 3);
a first connection (1; Figure 1b) between the first wipe and the second wipe;
a second connection (1; Figure 1b) between the second wipe and the third wipe;
wherein each wipe has a first edge (top edge of sheet 3; Figure 1b), a second edge (bottom edge of sheet 3; Figure 1b) parallel to the first edge, a longitudinal direction extending parallel to the right and left edges (through the center of Figure 1b extending from left to right), a transverse direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, and a longitudinal centerline extending in the longitudinal direction and positioned midway between the right and left edges (see Figure 1b), and each wipe (3) having a first side (top portion of wipe 3) transversely between the centerline and the first edge and defining a second side (bottom portion of wipe 3) transversely between the centerline and the second edge; and
wherein the first connection (top first connection 1; Figure 1b) and the second connection (top second connection 1; Figure 1b) are positioned proximal the first side (top portion of wipe 3) of each connecting wipe (3), and the second side (bottom portion of wipe 3) of each wipe (3) is detached from any other wipe in the stack (see section 2; Figure 1b).
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.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muckenfuhs (US 5,332,118).
Referring to claim 23. Muckenfuhs discloses wherein the connector has an effective transverse width that is at most 50% of a transverse width of the stack.
Muckenfuhs does not specifically disclose wherein the connector has an effective transverse width that is at most 10% of a transverse width of the stack.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Muckenfuhs to include the connector having an effective transverse width that is at most 10% of a transverse width of the stack, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
In addition, a secondary rejection…
Claims 23-26 and 38-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muckenfuhs (US 5,332,118) in view of (DE 20314147 U).
Referring to claim 23. Muckenfuhs does not specifically disclose wherein the connector has an effective transverse width that is at most 10% of a transverse width of the stack.
DE 20314147 U discloses a plurality of interconnected sheets comprising different configurations of attachment connectors to attach adjacent sheets, wherein the connector has an effective transverse width that is at most 10% of a transverse width of the stack (see member 4 in Figure 1C; member 1 in Figure 4; member 1 in Figure 5).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Muckenfuhs to include the connector having an effective transverse width that is at most 10% of a transverse width of the stack as taught by DE 20314147 U because a smaller width size of the connector would allow for a more easier separation of adjacent wipe sheets.
Referring to claims 24 and 38. Muckenfuhs in view of DE 20314147 U disclose a system for dispensing wipes (Figure 8), the system comprising:
wherein the connector (680; Figure 15 Muckenfuhs or connector member 4 in Figure 1C; member 1 in Figure 4; member 1 in Figure 5; DE 20314147 U) is positioned closer to the first edge (top edge of sheet 610A as shown in Figure 15) than the longitudinal centerline (center line in Figure 15).
Referring to claims 25 and 39. DE 20314147 U discloses a plurality of interconnected sheets wherein the connector comprises two to ten bridging strips (see 2 bridging members in Figure 1b).
Referring to claims 26 and 40. Muckenfuhs in view of DE 20314147 U do not specifically disclose wherein each bridging strip has a transverse width of one to five millimeters.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Muckenfuhs in view of DE 20314147 U to include each bridging strip having a transverse width of one to five millimeters, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Claims 30-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (DE 20314147 U) in view of Muckenfuhs (US 5,332,118)
Referring to claim 30. DE 20314147 U does not specifically disclose wherein the interconnected wipes of the stack are folded in an accordion style, and wherein each wipe in the stack has a transverse centerline, and each wipe is folded in the longitudinal direction to have each connection proximal to the transverse centerline.
Muckenfuhs discloses a system for dispensing wipes (Figure 8), the system comprising:
interconnected wipes (610) of the stack (stack in S; Figure 8) are folded in an accordion style (see Figure 8), and wherein each wipe (610) in the stack has a transverse centerline (see Figure 14), and each wipe is folded in the longitudinal direction to have each connection proximal to the transverse centerline (see Figure 8 and 14).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of DE 20314147 U to include the interconnected wipes of the stack are folded in an accordion style, wherein each wipe in the stack has a transverse centerline, and each wipe is folded in the longitudinal direction to have each connection proximal to the transverse centerline as taught by Muckenfuhs because the wipes can be stored as a stack in a rectangular container.
Referring to claim 31. DE 20314147 U discloses a plurality of interconnected sheets (Figure 1c) comprising
wherein the first connection (first connection between first sheet 3 and the second sheet 3; Figure 1b) and the second connection (second connection between second sheet 3 and the third sheet 3; Figure 1b) each have an effective transverse width that is at most 10% of a transverse width of the stack (see Figure 1c).
Referring to claim 32. DE 20314147 U discloses a plurality of interconnected sheets (Figure 1c) comprising
wherein the first connection and the second connection are positioned closer to the first edge (top edge of sheet 3; Figure 1c) than the longitudinal centerline (see Figure 1c).
Referring to claim 33. DE 20314147 U discloses a plurality of interconnected sheets wherein the connector comprises two to ten bridging strips (see 2 bridging members in Figure 1b).
Referring to claim 34. DE 20314147 U in view of Muckenfuhs do not specifically disclose wherein each bridging strip has a transverse width of one to five millimeters.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of DE 20314147 U in view of Muckenfuhs to include each bridging strip having a transverse width of one to five millimeters, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Claims 27 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muckenfuhs (US 5,332,118) in view of (DE 20314147 U) and further in view of Rippl (US 2009/0236358 A1).
Referring to claim 27 and 38. Muckenfuhs in view of DE 20314147 U do not specifically disclose wherein the orifice of the dispenser container is positioned closer to the first side of the stack of wipes than the second side of the stack of wipes.
Rippl discloses a disposable tissue dispenser (10; Figure 4) wherein the orifice (40) of the dispenser container (10) is positioned closer to the first side (side opposite side 20) of the stack of wipes than the second side of the stack of wipes.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Muckenfuhs in view of DE 20314147 U to include the orifice of the dispenser container as being positioned closer to the first side of the stack of wipes than the second side of the stack of wipes as taught by Rippl because an aperture disposed closer to one side of the dispenser would allow the sheet to be removed closer to one side of the dispenser.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAKESH KUMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8314. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH from 8AM-6:30PM EST.
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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/RAKESH KUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights