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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114 was filed in this application after appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, but prior to a decision on the appeal. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114 and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the appeal has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114 and prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on Status
5/22/2026 has been entered.
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8-9, 11-14, 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (WO0248000) in view of Blish (3428171) and further in view of Pirro (6308832).
Saito discloses:
1. A reusable recyclable packing pouch (figs 1-21) comprising: a plastic container (1 with two portions such as container with two portions in figs 9-13) comprising: first portion with a shaped region having a flange extending around a perimeter of the shaped region (such as with fig 11 at element 1 with flange adjacent 1a), and a second portion sized to mate with the flange such as to define a space between facing surfaces of the second portion and the shaped region of the first portion (such as in fig 11 with element 9 and space between two elements); a paperboard jacket comprising an aperture defined therethrough (adjacent 2), wherein the aperture is sized to permit the shaped region of the plastic container to pass through while the flange extends past edges of aperture and overlaps with a region of paperboard jacket at a periphery of the aperture (Capable of performing the above intended use, as for example shown in figs 1-7, 12-13); and an adhesive coating located on a surface of the paperboard jacket (adjacent 2c).
Saito discloses the claimed invention above with the exception of the following which is disclosed by Blish: perforations extending from an edge of an aperture to an outer edge of a jacket (17 extends from the perimeter of 10 to the aperture of the plastic container in fig 1-4; the Office notes that the primary reference already discloses an aperture of the jacket). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Saito in view of Blish (by providing the above element on the jacket from edge to existing aperture) in order to assist the user in opening the device to easily access the desired contents. For example, Blish provides that the positioning of the perforations enhances opening in that finger gripping portions are provided for both hands.
The Combined Reference discloses the claimed invention above with the exception of the following which is disclosed by Pirro: Pirro discloses similar art (figs 1-18) wherein the adhesive coating is located within a second region of the paperboard jacket that does not overlap with the region of paperboard jacket at a periphery of the aperture (as shown in fig 18, 15 such as with 15 in fig 15; col. 4: 48-65). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the Combined Reference in view of Pirro (by ensuring that the adhesive occupies a region outside periphery of aperture) in order to permit the plastic container to be more easily removed from the jacket. The above permits the device to function as intended while also providing independent usage and enhanced reusability, as the device still remains sandwiched and protected between while permitting ease of removability and replacement.
Saito discloses:
2. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 1, wherein the plastic container further comprises a transparent portion (the plastic is clear).
3. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 2, wherein the transparent portion permits scanning of a machine readable code contained within the plastic container (capable of performing the above intended use due to the transparency provided).
4. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 3, wherein the machine readable code contains information regarding a content of the reusable recyclable packing pouch (the above is intended use, capable of performing the above intended use, such as permitting scanning of such as element that is not required).
8. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 1, wherein the shaped region is sized to contain shipping documents (capable of performing the above intended use, such as documents smaller than the provided recess space).
9. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 1, wherein the shaped region is configured to accommodate a tracking sensor within the space defined between the facing surfaces of the of the second portion and the shaped region of the first portion (capable of performing the above intended use, such as sensor that is smaller than the provided space).
11. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 1, wherein the plastic container is polyethylene terephthalate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the material because it has been held that selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use was an obvious extension of the prior teaching. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
12. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 1, wherein the plastic container comprises a recyclable plastic material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the material because it has been held that selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use was an obvious extension of the prior teaching. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
25. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 1, wherein the paperboard jacket comprises a release lining covering the adhesive coating (adjacent 3).
Saito discloses:
13. A shipping container with a reusable recyclable packing pouch (figs 1-21), the shipping container comprising: a package configured to container one or more objects (adjacent 4 or 12 capable of performing the above intended use); a plastic container positioned on a surface of the shipping container (1 with two portions such as in figs 9-13), the plastic container comprising: first portion with a shaped region having a flange extending around a perimeter of the shaped region (such as with fig 11 at element 1 with flange adjacent 1a), and a second portion mated with the flange to define a space between facing surfaces of the second portion and the shaped region of the first portion (such as in fig 11 with element 9 and space between two elements); and a paperboard jacket adhered to the surface of the shipping container (as in fig 6) and the paperboard jacket comprising an aperture defined therethrough (adjacent 2), wherein the shaped region of the plastic container extends through the aperture while the paperboard jacket overlaps the flange of the plastic container so as to retain the plastic container in place on the surface of the shipping container (as in fig 6), and an adhesive coating located on a surface of the paperboard jacket (adjacent 2c).
Saito discloses the claimed invention above with the exception of the following which is disclosed by Blish: perforations extending from an edge of an aperture to an outer edge of a jacket (17 extends from the perimeter of 10 to the aperture of the plastic container in fig 1-4; the Office notes that the primary reference already discloses an aperture of the jacket). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Saito in view of Blish (by providing the above element on the jacket from edge to existing aperture) in order to assist the user in opening the device to easily access the desired contents. For example, Blish provides that the positioning of the perforations enhances opening in that finger gripping portions are provided for both hands.
The Combined Reference discloses the claimed invention above with the exception of the following which is disclosed by Pirro: Pirro discloses similar art (figs 1-18) wherein the adhesive coating is located within a second region of the paperboard jacket that does not overlap with the region of paperboard jacket at a periphery of the aperture (as shown in fig 18, 15 such as with 15 in fig 15; col. 4: 48-65). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the Combined Reference in view of Pirro (by ensuring that the adhesive occupies a region outside periphery of aperture) in order to permit the plastic container to be more easily removed from the jacket.
Saito further discloses:
14. The reusable recyclable packing pouch of claim 13, wherein the plastic container further comprises a transparent portion (the plastic is clear).
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Combined Reference as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hodes (20020088855).
The Combined Reference discloses the claimed invention above with the exception of the following which is disclosed by Hodes: a monitoring device configured to sense a condition of a package to which the reusable recyclable packing pouch is attached, wherein the condition of the package comprises one or more of a location of the package, an orientation of the package, or a handling history of the package (paragraph 7 such as a barcode being the monitoring device as the device related to monitoring information about the package; any information related to the device may be provided via the above system). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the Combined Reference in view of Hodes (by providing the above on or within the device) in order to provide related information to the user in order to assist the user with the use of the device, or other information related to the device to assist the user.
Claim(s) 23, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Combined Reference as applied to claim 22, 1 above, and further in view of Sirago (3456784).
The Combined Reference discloses the claimed invention including extension of perforations from a corner of aperture (Blish figs 1, 2) above with the exception of the following which is disclosed by Sirago: corner of jacket (Sirago teaches that it is well known to have perforations at various points along an edge, as for example at a corner of the jacket as in fig 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the Combined Reference in view of Sirago (by providing that the above elements extend from corner of aperture to corner of jacket) in order to providing ease of opening as for example permitting the user to grip more equally sized surfaces to enhance grip and tearing force.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/22/2026have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states that the prior art does not disclose “wherein the adhesive coating is located within a second region of the paperboard jacket that does not overlap with the region of paperboard jacket at a periphery of the aperture”. Pirro discloses similar art (figs 1-18) wherein the adhesive coating is located within a second region of the paperboard jacket that does not overlap with the region of paperboard jacket at a periphery of the aperture (as shown in fig 18, 15 such as with 15 in fig 15; col. 4: 48-65). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the Combined Reference in view of Pirro (by ensuring that the adhesive occupies a region outside periphery of aperture) in order to permit the plastic container to be more easily removed from the jacket. Applicant also provides a limited purpose of the device of Saito in Applicant’s own words. The purpose of Saito is to hold contents, protect the contents and provide access to such. The modification with the prior art enhances the above purpose. The above permits the device to function as intended while also providing independent usage and enhanced reusability, as the device still remains sandwiched and protected between while permitting ease of removability and replacement.. Accordingly, Applicant/Appellant has not demonstrated error in the factual findings or reasoning set forth by the Office and the Office must maintain the above rejections.
Conclusion
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW D PERREAULT whose telephone number is (571)270-5427. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-5:30pm.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571)272-4561. 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.
/ANDREW D PERREAULT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights