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 .
In view of the Appeal Brief filed on 04/08/2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. New grounds of rejection are set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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(s) 32-34, 36, 38, 40, 42-48, and 50-53 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littlejohn et al. (US 2006/0208054 A1; hereinafter Littlejohn) Lyons et al. (US 2014/0370273 A1; hereinafter Lyons).
Regarding claims 32, 38, 42-47, and 52-53, Littlejohn discloses a pressed paperboard servingware with improved rigidity and rim stiffness comprising a coated paperboard substrate thermoformed (see Par. 0038 and 0129) to define a coated bottom panel (12), coated sidewall panels (16), and a coated flange panel (26), the coated paperboard substrate comprising a paperboard substrate having a first major side and a second major side (i.e. inner vs. outer), the first major side forming an interior surface of the thermoformed paperboard tray; a continuous polymer barrier coating applied on the first major side of the coated bottom panel, coated sidewall panels, and coated flange panel (Examiner notes that the coating is present over the entire blank; thus, Examiner considers the coating to be continuous over the bottom, sidewall and flange), wherein the coated flange panel comprises a first coated flange portion (56) and a second coated flange portion (60) coupled by a creased portion (58; see Figures 2A-D). Littlejohn lacks teaching that the pressed paperboard plate barrier coating comprises a stiffness measured as an elastic modulus of at least 1.5 GPa.
Lyons discloses a coating composition and coated paper and coated paperboard comprising a single-ply paperboard substrate having a first major side and a second major side (see Fig. 1); and a barrier coating on the first major side of the single-ply paperboard substrate having an elastic modulus of at least 1.5 GPa (see Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to modify Littlejohn’s pressed paperboard plate to have the barrier coatings’ elastic modulus stiffness measurement be at least 1.5 GPa by using the appropriate clay and carbonate blend as a known substitution in the art of coating paperboard substrates.
Regarding claims 33-34, Littlejohn, as modified above, discloses a paper plate wherein the paperboard substrate has a caliper thickness between 0.010 inch and 0.035 inch (Littlejohn; see Par. 0020) and a basis weight between 60 pounds per 3000 sq ft and 400 pounds per 3000 sq ft (Littlejohn; see Par. 0125).
Regarding claim 36, Littlejohn, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention except for the thickness of the barrier layer. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to further modify the paperboard barrier layer to have an average thickness of 0.00025 inches or more depending on the needs of the end product, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 40, Littlejohn, as modified above, discloses a pressed thermoformed paper plate wherein the sidewall panels have a height between 0.75 inches and 2 inches (Littlejohn; see Par. 0154).
Regarding claim 48, Littlejohn, as modified above, discloses a pressed thermoformed paper plate wherein the tray blank is preconditioned to a controlled moisture content between 9% and 14% by weight prior to thermoforming (Littlejohn; see Par. 0134).
Regarding claims 50-51, Littlejohn, as modified above, discloses a pressed paperboard plate wherein the thermoforming process is performed at a temperature between 110°F and 450°F to ensure proper shaping of the coated paperboard substrate while maintaining the integrity of the barrier coating (Littlejohn; see Par. 0138).
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littlejohn in view of Lyons as applied to claim 32 above, and further in view of Koenig et al. (US 2016/0348318 A1; hereinafter Koenig).
Regarding claim 35, Littlejohn, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention except for an internal sizing agent incorporated therein. Koenig teaches a hydrophobic coated paper substrate for polymer emulsion topcoats comprising an internal sizing agent incorporated within a paperboard substrate (see Par. 0013-0015). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to further modify Littlejohn’s rigid pressed paper plate to include an internal sizing agent within the paperboard substrate in order to protect said substrate from moisture degradation (Koenig; see Par. 0003 and 0006-0009).
Claim(s) 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littlejohn in view of Lyons as applied to claim 32 above, and further in view of Piechocinski (US 9701435 B2).
Regarding claim 37, Littlejohn, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention except for the barrier coating including polylactic acid. Piechocinski teaches a foldable liquid retaining bowl comprising a barrier coating including a polylactic acid (Col 3 lines 25-50). Examiner considers polylactic acid to be a biopolymer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to modify Littlejohn’s barrier coating to include polylactic acid as a known substitution of barrier coatings that are both waterproof and environmentally friendly, as taught by Piechockinski.
Claim(s) 42-46 and 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littlejohn in view of Lyons as applied to claim 47 above, and further in view of Ribu et al. (US 11072458 B2; hereinafter Ribu).
Regarding claims 42-46 and 49, Littlejohn, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention except for applying a film over the pressed paperboard plate/tray. Ribu teaches a container with oleophilic/oleophobic patterns on a sealing surface comprising a coated paperboard plate/tray (10) further comprising a sealing film (20) applied thereon to enclose a food product (see Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to further modify Littlejohn’s pressed paper plate/tray to further include a film sealed over the top in order to protect contents (Ribu; Col 5 lines 17-34).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 4-14, filed 04/08/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 32-34, 36,38, 40, 42-48, and 50-53 under USC 103(a)—Aarando in view of Swoboda and Lyons have been fully considered and are persuasive. The primary reference, Aarando, teaches away from adding barrier coating to the paperboard substrate. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of USC 103(a)—Littlejohn in view of Lyons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE whose telephone number is (571)270-1982. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday through 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, NATHAN J NEWHOUSE can be reached at (571)272-4544. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights