Ex Parte Fleissner

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Feb 23, 2007

10169909 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 23, 2007)

The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte GEROLD FLEISSNER
____________

Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909
Technology Center 1700
____________

Decided: February 23, 2007
____________

Before EDWARD C. KIMLIN, CHUNG K. PAK, and CHARLES F.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judges.

PAK, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the
Examiner's refusal to allow claims 2 through 7 and 13 through 21, all of the
claims pending in the above-identified application. We have jurisdiction
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6.
I. APPEALED SUBJECT MATTER
The subject matter on appeal is directed to a multi-layered nonwoven
fabric made by an air-lay method. See the Specification, 1-3. The multi-
Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

2
layered nonwoven fabric may be subsequently strengthened by means of
heat (e.g., hot air, calendaring (heated rollers) or infrared radiation) and
hydrodynamic needling (hydraulic entangling). See the Specification, 3
Further details of the appealed subject matter are recited in claims 13,
14, and 21, which are reproduced below:
13. Multi-layered composite non-woven fabric comprising two outer
layers, which are formed in accordance with an air-lay method from
fusion adhesives fibres [sic, fibers], which are from 8 to 10 mm
maximum in length, between which layers is laid a further layer made
of super-absorbent pulp, which is also produced according to the air-
lay method, wherein this composite non-woven fabric, which is
formed solely according to the air-lay method, is strengthened by
means of the hydrodynamic needling.

14. A process for compaction of a nonwoven, comprising:

continuously forming a multilayered nonwoven fabric by an
air-lay process, comprising:

air-laying a bottom layer comprising thermally activatable
staple fibers;

air-laying cellulose fibers over the bottom layer; and

air-laying a top layer comprising thermally activatable staple
fibers over the cellulose fibers; and

subjecting the multilayered nonwoven fibric [sic, fabric] to
hydrodynamic needling for compaction and
intimate connection of the fibers.

21. A nonwoven made by the process according to claim 14.

Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

3
II. PRIOR ART
The Examiner has relied upon the following references as evidence of
unpatentability:
Suskind US 4,808,467 Feb. 28, 1989
Radwanski US 4,931,355 Jun. 5, 1990
Haid US 5,240,764 Aug. 31, 1993
Roussin-Moynier US 5,375,306 Dec. 27, 1994
Quantrille US 5,393,599 Feb. 28, 1995
Schilkowski WO 97/30223 Aug. 21, 1997
Hamajima US 5,720,737 Feb. 24, 1998

III. REJECTIONS
The Examiner has rejected the claims on appeal as follows:
1) Claims 2 through 7 and 14 through 19, and 21under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Schikowski,
Quantrille, Radwanski, Haid, Roussin-Moynier, and optionally Suskind; and
2) Claims 13 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. §103 as unpatentable over
the combined disclosures of Schikowski, Quantrille, Radwanski, Haid,
Roussin-Moynier, Hamajima, and optionally Suskind.
IV. FACTUAL FINDINGS, ANALYSES, AND CONCULSIONS
Having carefully evaluated the claims, Specification and prior art
references, including the arguments advanced by the Appellant and the
Examiner in support of their respective positions, we determine that the
Examiner’s § 103 rejections set forth in the Answer1are well founded.
Accordingly, we will sustain the Examiner’s decision rejecting the claims on
appeal for the factual findings and conclusions set forth in the Answer. We
add the following primarily for emphasis and completeness.

1 We refer to the Answer mailed on June 14, 2006 as “the Answer” in this decision.
Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

4
Claims 2 through 7 and 14 through 19, and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Schikowski, Quantrille,
Radwanski, Haid, Roussin-Moynier, and optionally Suskind

As acknowledged by the Appellant (Br. 4),
[Schikowski] discloses a method of producing a material by dry
forming in which a multilayered non-woven fabric is produced
by successfully air-laying bonding fibers, then cellulose fibers
and again bonding fibers. . . the fabric is [then] passed thorough
a pair of rollers, which are preferably heated, and then
conveyed to a flow-through oven in which the binding fibers
are activated.2

The Appellant has also acknowledged that it is known that “[t]his type of
production [i.e., the air-laying method taught by Schikowski] has the
advantage of higher achievable speed compared to the formation of card
non-woven fabric” (Spec. 1). Further, the Appellant has acknowledged that
calendaring, after air-laying, the fibers is known to strengthen the
multilayered non-woven fabric (Spec. 1). Indeed, Schikowski, at page 4,
states that:
For stabilizing the very thin outer layers on the produced
web, the web together with the wire is passed through a pair of
rollers 12, 14, which are preferably heated for achieving a sligt
[sic, slight] compaction of the product, whereby it is
consolidated sufficiently for a following conveying to a flow-
through oven 16, in which the binding fibres [sic, fibers] are
activated.

From the oven 16 the web, now stabilized, is moved
through a calandar [sic, calendar] unit 18, the rollers of which

2 There is no dispute that the claimed bottom and top layers comprising “thermally
activatable staple fibers” encompass the bottom and top bonding fiber layers taught by
Schilkowski. Compare the Answer in its entirety with the Brief and the Reply Brief in
their entirety.
Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

5
are kept heated to a temperature a few degree below the
actuation temperature of the binding fibres [sic, fibers]. . . .

In connection with the calandering [sic, calendaring] the
web may be subjected to a point or line embossing for
additional stabilization of the thin outer layers and for
counteracting delamination of the products.

The calendaring is used to weld the bottom and top bonding fiber layers of
the multi-layered nonwoven fabric. See Schikowski, page 2. This multi-
layered non-woven fabric is useful as an absorbent wiping sheet or absorbent
inserts in sanitary articles, e.g., in sanitary napkins for women. See also
Schilkowski, Abstract and page 1. However, as correctly argued by the
Appellant (Br. 4), Schilkowski does not mention hydrodynamic needling
(i.e., hydro-entangling or hydraulic entangling) an air-lay nonwoven fabric.
To show obviousness of employing the hydrodynamic needling in the
method taught by Schikowski, the Examiner has additionally relied on
Quantrille, Radwanski, Haid, Roussin-Moynier, and optionally Suskind
(Answer 4-7). According to the Examiner (id.), Quantrile, Radwanski, Haid,
Roussin-Moynier, and Suskind individually, or in combination, would have
suggested the employment of an exceptionally advantageous conventional
nonwoven fabric strengthening (bonding) method, such as that claimed, to
further strengthen the multi-layered non-woven fabric taught by
Schilkowski.
The dispositive question is, therefore, whether one of ordinary skill in
the art would have been led to employ the admittedly advantageous method
taught by Schilkowski, together with the subsequent hydrodynamic needling
(hydroentangling) method, to produce a further strengthened multi-layered
Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

6
nonwoven fabric within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103. On this record, we
answer this question in the affirmative.
As is apparent from pages 5-7 of the Answer, Quantrille, Radwanski,
Haid, Roussin-Moynier, and Suskind individually teach the advantage of
employing the claimed hydrodynamic needling and calendaring in
strengthening nonwoven absorbent fabrics useful for wiping or women’s
sanitary napkins. Quantrile, for example, teaches hydroentangling and
calendaring a multi-layered web comprising a pair of carded nonwoven fiber
outer layers and a core elastomeric layer useful for, inter alia, diapers and
personal hygiene products. See column 1, lines 20-21, column 6, lines 33-
44 and column 7, lines 30-62. “As a result of the hydroentangling treatment,
at least a portion of the fibers in each of the carded layers 12 and 26 extend
through elastomeric layer 20, for example, through apertures in the
elastomeric net and into the carded layer on the other side of the net.” See
column 6, lines 39-44. The hydroentanglement method, according to
column 8, lines 25-39, is generally preferred over other well known textile
bonding methods. Quantrile also teaches that a multi-layered web having
nonwoven webs other than carded webs, such as nonwoven webs formed by
air laying, can be subjected to hydroentangling and calendaring. See column
8, lines 57-61. Specifically, Quantrile teaches that “[n]onwoven webs other
than carded webs can also be employed in the production of fabrics of the
invention. Nonwoven staple webs can be formed by air laying, garneting,
wet laying and similar processes known in the art…” (id.)
Similarly, Haid teaches a process for making hydraulically needled
(spunlaced), nonwoven fabrics (either carded or air-lay fibers) useful for
apparel and wiper application. See column 1, lines 5-26 and column 2, lines
Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

7
33-36. Haid, like Schilkowski and the Appellant, forms a nonwoven fabric
with fusible fibers (binder fibers) and non-fusible fibers (cellulosic pulps and
fibers). See column 2, lines 5-13 and 51-55 and column 3, lines 1-16. Haid
teaches the advantage of employing a combination of light thermal bonding
and hydraulically needling to bond air-lay fusible and non-fusible fibers.
See column 2, lines 5-32. The light thermal bonding is said to strengthen the
integrity of the web, while the hydraulically needling is said to stabilize the
web surface and increase web durability and abrasion resistance. See
column 2, lines 19-32.
Suskind, like Schilkowski and the Appellant, teaches the advantage of
bonding air-formed (air-laid) pulp fibers and synthetic fibers via a
combination light thermal bonding and hydraulic needling. Specifically,
Suskind teaches (col. 1, ll. 18-57) that:
Composite webs made up of various combinations of
fibers are known in the prior art….

Nonwoven fibrous webs comprising mixtures of wood
pulp and synthetic fibers have high moisture absorption
capabilities and may be inexpensively produced by
conventional papermaking procedures. However, such products
also tend to have relatively low wet strength properties and lack
sufficient strength for many applications, for example, for use
as household cloths, food service wipes and industrial
machinery wipes. The strength of such products may be
improved by including a bonding agent in the fiber furnish….
When the strength characteristics of the web are improved by
use of an adhesive binder…, the liquid absorption capability of
the web is correspondingly decreased.

In accordance with the present invention, a high strength
nonwoven absorbent fabr ic [sic, fabric] may be produced…
Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

8
A spunbonded web is formed in known manner and combined
with an unbonded or lightly bonded air laid…pulp and textile
fibes [sic, fibers] by hydraulic entanglement. [Emphasis
added.]

Roussin-Moynier, like Haid, Schilkowski and the Appellant, teaches
hydraulically bonding short absorbing fibers from wood pulp and longer
synthetic fibers to produce a nonwoven absorbing web useful for household
wipes. See column 1, ll. 5-19 and column 3, ll. 10-22. Roussin-Moynier
further teaches (col. 2, l. 65 to col. 3, l. 3) that:
tear-resistance is further improved by selecting synthetic
thermoplastic fibers and in subjecting the web leaving the
hydrauling-bonding station to thermal bonding wherein the
thermoplastic fibers are molten at least in part so that following
cooling there shall be bonding zones between these fibers.
[Emphasis added.]

Radwanski teaches (col. 1, ll. 30-51) that:
U.S. Pat. No. 4,100,324 to Anderson et al, the contents of
which are incorporated herein by reference, discloses a
nonwoven fabric-like composite material which consists
essentially of an air-formed [air-laid] matrix of thermoplastic
polymer microfibers having an average fiber diameter of less
than about 10 microns, and a multiplicity of individualized
wood pulp fibers disposed throughout the matrix of microfibers
and engaging at least some of the microfibers to space the
microfibers apart from each other… the wood pulp fibers can
be interconnected by and held captive within the matrix of
microfibers by mechanical entanglement of the microfibers with
the wood pulp fibers, the mechanical entanglement and
interconnection of the microfibers and wood pulp fibers alone,
without additional bonding,… thus forming a coherent
integrated fibrous structure. However, the strength of the web
can be improved by embossing the web… at an elevated
temperature so that the thermoplastic microfibers are flattened
Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

9
into a film-like structure in the embossed areas. [Emphasis
added.]

Radwanski goes onto teach (col. 4, ll. 16-27) that:
The use of hydraulic entangling techniques, to mechanically
entangle (e.g., mechanically bond) the fibrous material, rather
than using other bonding techniques, including other
mechanical entangling techniques such as needle punching,
provides a composite nonwoven fibrous web material having
increased web strength and integrity, and allows for better
control of other product attributes, such as absorbency, wet
strength, hand and drape, printability, abrasion resistance,
barrier properties, patterning, tactile feeling, visual aesthetics,
controlled bulk, etc. [Emphasis added.]

Given the above recognition of the advantage of employing a
combination of conventional bonding techniques, i.e., thermal bonding (light
bonding) and hydraulic entanglement, for bonding air-formed wood pulp
fibers and synthetic fibers, we concur with the Examiner that the prior art
references as a whole would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to
employ such bonding techniques, motivated by a reasonable expectation of
successfully bonding and improving the properties of the multi-layered
nonwoven absorbent fabric taught by Schilkowski. In reaching this
determination, we consider the Appellant’s argument that one of ordinary
skill in the art would not have employed the above bonding combination to
the air-formed multi-layered nonwoven fabric taught by Schilkowski. See,
e.g., the Reply Brief, pages 1-3. However, the Appellant has not proffered
any objective evidence to contradict the evidence relied upon by the
Examiner.

Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

10
Claims 13 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. §103 as Unpatentable over the Combined
Disclosures of Schikowski, Quantrille, Radwanski, Haid, Roussin-Moynier,
Hamajima, and Optionally Suskind

The combined disclosures of Schikowski, Quantrille, Radwanski,
Haid, Roussin-Moynier, and Suskind are discussed above. Having
recognized Schikowski, for example, does not mention the length of heat-
fusible binding fibers, the Examiner has relied on the disclosure of
Hamajima and official notice to show that such length is conventionally
employed in the nonwoven absorbent wipe art. See the Answer, page 7.
Specifically, the Examiner has found (Answer, 7-8) that:
[I]t is conventional in the absorbent web making art to use heat-
fusible binding fibers having an average length in the range of
3-20 mm, and binder fibers having an average length of 3 mm
and 5mm are commercially available heat-fusible fibers as
exemplified in the teachings of Hamajima et al (col. 13[,] lines
3-16; examples 1 and 3)…it is well known and conventional in
the art to form an absorbent article comprising a superabsorbent
pulp. ..binder fibers with an average length of 3 mm and 5 mm
should not be expected…to contain any fibers greater than 6
mm and 10 mm, respectively.

The Appellant has not disputed this finding (Br. 9-10). In fact, the Appellant
has acknowledged that “the length of the fibers which are employed for the
preparation of a composite non-woven by an air-lay method are very short,
i.e., 8-10 mm maximum, e.g., 1 to 3 mm (Br. 10).” In other words, the
Appellant has admitted that Schikowski’s heat-fusible binding fibers
inherently have the claimed lengths since the heat-fusible binding fibers and
cellulose fibers used to form the multi-layered nonwoven fabric taught by
Schikowski are laid via an air-laying method.
Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909

11
Thus, the dispositive question is whether one of ordinary skill in the
art would have been led to employ the admittedly advantageous method
taught by Schikowski, together with the subsequent hydrodynamic needling
(hydroentangling) method, to produce a further strengthened multi-layered
nonwoven fabric within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103. For the factual
findings set forth in the Answer and supra, we answer this question in the
affirmative.
V. CONCLUSION
On this record, we determine that the preponderance of evidence
weighs most heavily in favor of obviousness within the meaning of 35
U.S.C. § 103(a).
VI. ORDER
The Examiner’s decision rejecting the claims on appeal under 35
U.S.C. §103(a) is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (2007).
AFFIRMED

hh

ANTONELLI, TERRY, STOUT & KRAUS, LLP
1300 NORTH SEVENTEENTH STREET
SUITE 1800
ARLINGTON, VA 22209-3873