DETAILED OFFICIAL 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 .
Examiner Note
It is noted that all references hereinafter to Applicant’s specification (“spec”) are to the published application US 2022/0185558, unless stated otherwise. Further, any italicized text utilized hereinafter is to be interpreted as emphasis placed thereupon.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 04 February 2026 in response to the Non-Final Rejection dated 14 November 2025 (hereinafter “NFOA”) has been entered. Claim 21 has been canceled, and claim 1 has been amended – as such, claims 1-16 remain pending and under consideration on the merits.
The cancelation of claim 21/amendments to claim 1 have overcome the rejection of claim 21 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and the corresponding indefiniteness issue [NFOA, ¶6-10]. As such, the 112(b) rejection has been withdrawn, and the Examiner thanks Applicant for correction of the issues and indication of support for the amendments in the spec at [0080, 0088-0089, 0092].
The amendments to the claims have overcome each and every rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 previously set forth in the NFOA. As such, the 102(a)(1) and 103 rejections have been withdrawn. However, new grounds of rejection are set forth herein, necessitated by the amendments to the claims.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“wherein the outer package is sealed to the inner package according to claim 10.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 6-8, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okhai (GB 2502241; “Okhai”) (previously cited, copy previously provided) in view of Toft et al. (US 2018/0311940; “Toft”) (previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Okhai discloses a multilayer packaging material, and a packaging container formed therefrom for, inter alia food products requiring protection from degradation due to oxidation and/or moisture exposure [Abstract; Fig. 2; p. 1 ln. 1-12; p. 6 ln. 1-31; p. 14 ln. 1-12]. The packaging material [Fig. 2; p. 4 ln. 21-24; p. 10 ln. 1-9, 23-29] comprises the following layers in the order stated (i.e., 3/2/1/2/3):
Barrier layer (3) – comprises particles dispersed in a polymer, wherein said polymer is, inter alia a polysaccharide; prohibits ingress of moisture and oxygen into the sealant layer [p. 8 ln. 10-30; p. 11 ln. 23-26; p. 13 ln. 7-8] (ii. a polysaccharide-based composition coated ii.a on one side of said first parchment paper or ii.b on a bio-based binder coating which is coated directly on one side of said first parchment paper; provide an oxygen barrier)
Sealant layer (2) – formed from, inter alia polysaccharide which seals the pores of the paper substrate, smooths the surfaces thereof, and functions as an oxygen barrier [p. 6 ln. 24-35; p. 11 ln. 8-14; p. 13 ln. 4-9] (MPEP 2131.02(II), MPEP 2144.07) (bio-based binder coating, coated directly on one side of said first parchment paper)
Paper substrate (1) – formed from, inter alia parchment paper [p. 6 ln. 15-22] (MPEP 2131.02(II), MPEP 2144.07) (i. first parchment paper)
Sealant layer (2) – same as layer (2) above
Barrier layer (3) – same as layer (3) above.
Further, either or both sides of the packaging material – above the barrier layer(s) (3) – may be provided with a heat-sealable or cold-sealable layer, to impart heat or cold sealing functionality to the packaging material [p. 10 ln. 1-17]. Thus, the disclosure of Okhai encompasses the following embodiments of the packaging material, wherein “seal” designates a heat-sealable or cold-sealable layer: seal/3/2/1/2/3 and seal/3/2/1/2/3/seal.
Furthermore, the packaging material, inclusive of barrier layer (3) which imparts resistance to ingress of moisture and oxygen, exhibits an oxygen transmission rate (OTR) of no more than 10 cm3/m2·24 h, preferably no more than 5 or no more than 1 cm3/m2·24 h, measured at 23° C and 75% relative humidity (RH) [p. 13 ln. 20-24]. One of ordinary skill in the art readily recognizes, and it stands to reason, that the (paper-based, multilayer) packaging material of Okhai which exhibits an OTR of 10 cm3/m2·24 h or less at 75% RH, would exhibit the same OTR, or a lower OTR, when measured at a relatively lower RH (e.g., 50% RH, 0% RH) and the same temperature. That is, it stands to reason that the packaging material/barrier layer (3) (polysaccharide-based composition, providing an oxygen barrier) of Okhai, set forth/cited above, would have necessarily exhibited an OTR of 10 cm3/m2·24 h or less at 23° C and 50% RH, determined in accordance with ASTM D3985 or ISO 15105-2, as claimed, absent a showing of factually supported objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112 (IV) and (V), MPEP 2112.01 (I) and (II), MPEP 2145, and MPEP 2145(I).
With respect to the difference(s) relative to the sealed package for food defined by claim 1, Okhai does not explicitly disclose the packaging container formed from the packaging material being a sealed package, wherein the packaging material seals and forms a volume for storage of food, and wherein the barrier layer (3) (polysaccharide-based composition) is coated on the side of the package facing away from the formed volume.
Toft, directed to multilayer, parchment paper-based food packaging materials exhibiting resistance to ingress of oxygen and moisture, teaches that the packaging materials may be sealed – via an innermost heat-sealable layer – into a pillow-shaped or pouch-like container such as that depicted in Fig. 3b [Abstract; Fig. 3b; 0001-0002, 0026, 0033, 0039-0040, 0046, 0094, 0096, 0119, 0124-0126, 0178, 0204], reproduced hereinbelow, which defines a sealed (interior) volume for storage of food.
PNG
media_image1.png
179
365
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Okhai and Toft each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the packaging container/packaging material of Okhai by having formed the packaging material, set forth/cited above, into the sealed pouch-like container of Toft depicted in Fig. 3b and reproduced above, as the packaging material would have been readily recognized as heat-sealable (capable of being heat sealed) and suitable for the intended use of forming food packaging containers providing protection against degradation (to foods) caused by oxidation and/or moisture exposure (see MPEP 2144.07).
In accordance with the foregoing modification, the packaging material of Okhai (hereinafter “modified Okhai”), e.g., 3/2/1/2/3/seal or seal/3/2/1/2/3/seal would have been formed into a pouch-like food packaging container, with the seal layer defining the innermost surface/layer of the container. The packaging container of modified Okhai reads on the sealed package for food as defined by claim 1, wherein the paper substrate (1) reads on the first parchment paper sealing and forming a volume for storage of food, and the barrier layer (3) defining the outermost surface of the container or positioned closest thereto (in the instance where two seal layers are present) reads on wherein the polysaccharide-based composition is coated on the side of the packaging facing away from the formed volume.
The packaging container of modified Okhai above reads on the sealed package for food defined by each and every limitation of claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 above reads on the package defined by claim 6. The sealant layer (2) formed from polysaccharide (bio-based binder coating) is coated directly on the parchment paper substrate (1) (specifically, between the barrier layer (3) and substrate) (wherein the bio-based binder is coated directly on the first parchment paper).
Regarding claim 7, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, modified Okhai is silent regarding the packaging material including an additional parchment paper, coated with a bio-based binder being laminated to the paper substrate (1) on the side of the packaging material closest to the interior volume of the container, with said bio-based binder being disposed between the paper substrate (1) and the additional parchment paper.
However, Okhai discloses that the packaging material may include other layers in addition to layers 3/2/1/2/3 (and the seal layer(s)) [p. 10 ln. 1-9, 26-27].
Toft teaches that parchment paper layers (“facing layers”) may be provided on both sides of a “bulk layer” of paper-based material, wherein said paper-based material of the bulk layer may be a “spacer layer” which is also suitably formed from parchment paper or other cellulose-based materials (and may be pretreated with polysaccharides and/or MFC and/or NFC) [0024-0026, 0033, 0039-0040, 0043-0046, 0066, 0094-0098, 0102-0104, 0164-0166]. Bio-based adhesives, or bio-based interposed thermoplastic bonding polymers (e.g., melt-extrusion lamination) may be utilized to bond the layers to one another to form a multilayer laminate for food packaging applications/containers [Abstract; 0002-0003, 0051, 0109-0113, 0115, 0118, 0164-0166]. The use of the paper layers on each side of the bulk/spacer layer results in reduced curling of the multilayer laminate and improved package integrity by preventing degradation of (the) barrier layer(s) and/or delamination between layers [0156-0158].
In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the packaging material/container of modified Okhai (set forth above in rejection of claim 1) by having provided/laminated one or more additional parchment paper layer(s) on one or both sides of the packaging material, in order to have prevent curling of the material or reduced the degree thereof, and/or to have reduced the potential for delamination between layers and/or to (further) protect the underlying paper substrate, sealant, and/or barrier layers.
In accordance with the foregoing modification – and given that Okhai requires the sealant layers (2) be in direct contact with the (parchment) paper substrate (1) [Okhai, p. 10 ln. 11-17] – the packaging material of modified Okhai (and container formed therefrom) would have comprised at least one additional parchment paper layer, such as two additional parchment paper layers, laminated to/above the sealant layer(s) (2) or barrier layers (3) and below the one or both seal (hot- or cold-sealable) layers. That is, the packaging material of modified Okhai, as modified above, would have encompassed, inter alia the following layer sequence embodiments, wherein “parchment” designates the additional parchment paper layer(s), and wherein it is reiterated that paper substrate (1) is parchment paper:
seal/parchment/3/2/1/2/3/seal
seal/parchment/3/2/1/2/3/parchment/seal
seal/parchment/3/2/1/2/3
Embodiment (B) of the packaging material of modified Okhai, with either seal layer defining the innermost surface/layer of the packaging container; Embodiment (C), with the seal layer defining the innermost surface/layer of the packaging container; and Embodiment (A), with the first stated seal layer defining the innermost surface/layer of the packaging container, each read on the package defined by claim 7, wherein the barrier layer (3) (in any embodiment) adjacent to the parchment layer(s) (3) – formed from a polysaccharide-based composition in accordance with the disclosure of Okhai cited above in the rejection of claim 1 – reads on the bio-based binder recited in claim 7 (wherein a second parchment paper coated with a bio-based binder is laminated to the first parchment paper on the side of the package closest to the formed volume, wherein the bio-based binder coating of the second parchment paper is disposed between the first and second parchment papers).
Regarding claim 8, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, Okhai discloses that the barrier layer (3) (polysaccharide-based composition) exhibits a thickness of from 0.5-3 µm, preferably from 0.5-1 µm [p. 9 ln. 27-31; p. 13 ln. 10-11], each of which overlap, and thereby render prima facie obvious the claimed range of from 1 to 20 µm (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 14, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, Okhai is silent regarding the sealant layer(s) (2) (bio-based binder coating) exhibiting a thickness of from 5-50 µm, as claimed.
However, Okhai discloses that the sealant layer(s) suitably exhibit a coat weight of at least 2 g/m2, such as up to 50 g/m2 [p. 7 ln. 17-19; p. 11 ln. 17-19; p. 16 ln. 1-4, 17-18; p. 18 ln. 3-7, 20-21]. Applicant’s spec indicates that the bio-based binder coating, exhibiting a preferred thickness of up to 80 µm, and more preferably 5 to 50 µm [0040] (as claimed), may also exhibit/corresponds to a preferred surface weight of 1 to 100 g/m2, for example 1 to 80 g/m2 or 5 to 50 g/m2 [0041].
Given that the coat weight of the sealant layer(s) (2) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai may be at least 2 g/m2, with an example upper limit thereof being 50 g/m2, wherein the former encompasses Applicant’s disclosed bio-based binder coating surface weight and the latter is identical to the upper bound of Applicant’s disclosed exemplary binder coating surface weight, it stands to reason – and there is a strong expectation – that the sealant layer(s) (2) of modified Okhai (at least 2 g/m2) would have necessarily exhibited a thickness/thickness range which would have been within, or overlapped or encompassed and thereby rendered prima facie obvious, the claimed thickness range of 5 to 50 µm. Applicant is respectfully directed to MPEP 2112(IV) and (V), MPEP 2112.01(I) and (II), MPEP 2144.05(I), MPEP 2145, and MPEP 2145(I).
Regarding claim 16, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, the rejection of claim 7 above is incorporated herein by reference (not repeated for sake of brevity) and reads on the package defined by claim 16 (see at least ¶23-24). The packaging material/container of modified Okhai, in accordance with each of embodiments (A)-(C) above, read on the claimed package, wherein the barrier layer (3) adjacent the parchment layer reads on the polysaccharide-based composition with which the second parchment paper is coated, and the sealant layer (2) disposed adjacent the aforesaid barrier layer (3) and the parchment substrate (1) reads on the bio-based binder coated on the formed polysaccharide-based composition coating.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okhai in view of Toft as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Spender et al. (US 2018/0066073; “Spender”) (previously cited).
Regarding claim 2, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, modified Okhai is silent regarding the paper substrate (1) (parchment paper) being pretreated by a sizing agent selected from a resin and/or a rosin.
However, Okhai discloses that the parchment paper may be a greaseproof parchment paper [p. 6 ln. 15-22].
Spender teaches treatment of cellulosic materials utilized for food packaging containers, such as parchment paper sheets, with a sizing composition to increase the lipophobicity and barrier functionality thereof, while simultaneously maintaining the biodegradability/recyclability; wet strength may also be increased [Abstract; 0002-0005, 0008-0010, 0014-0016, 0055, 0065]. The sizing composition includes a saccharide fatty acid ester, and further, resins such as polyvinyl alcohol and/or polylactic acid, and auxiliary agents such as rosins/rosin soaps [0023-0024, 0026, 0030, 0033, 0097, 0100, 0128-0129, 0133; claim 41]. Spender teaches that the sizing composition is free from fluorocarbons and silicones [0134], to thereby maintain the “green” nature of the sheet sized thereby, i.e., the biodegradability and/or recyclability of the sized paper sheet is not sacrificed [0007-0008, 0134]. Spender constitutes prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention, in light of the aforecited disclosure/teachings.
In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the paper substrate (1) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai (set forth above in the rejection of claim 1) by having pretreated said substrate (1) with the sizing composition of Spender, inclusive of resins, such as PVOH, and optional agents such as rosins, in order to have increased the lipophobicity (oil/fat resistance) and/or wet strength and/or general barrier functionality of the paper substrate and thereby the packaging material/container as a whole, while maintaining the biodegradability thereof.
In accordance with the foregoing modification, the (parchment) paper substrate (1) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai would have been sized with the composition above including PVOH (resin), optionally inclusive of agents such as rosins (and/or rosins), thereby reading on the package defined by claim 2.
Regarding claim 4, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, the rejection of claim 2 above is incorporated herein by reference and reads on the package defined by claim 4. That is, the parchment paper substrate (1) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai would have been sized with the sizing composition of Spender of which is free from fluorocarbons and silicones (wherein the parchment paper is free from silicone-based and/or fluorine-based compounds).
Claims 3, 5, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okhai in view of Toft as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Saeki (JP 2017-222033; “Saeki”) (previously cited, copy previously provided).
Regarding claims 3, 5, and 15, in view of/set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above, the barrier layer(s) (3) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai are formed from a composition including a polymer that is, inter alia a polysaccharide (a polysaccharide-based composition).
With respect to the difference(s) relative to the package defined by claim 3, Okhai is silent regarding the polysaccharide-based composition including hemicellulose, microfibrillar cellulose (MFC), nanofibrillar cellulose (NFC), or mixtures thereof; relative to the package defined by claim 5, is silent regarding the composition comprising MFC and/or NFC; and relative to the package defined by claim 15, does not explicitly disclose that the polysaccharide does not comprise carboxymethyl cellulose, starch, and hydroxyethyl cellulose.
However, Okhai discloses that any polysaccharide may be utilized [p. 8 ln. 20-24], and is not limited to any named/exemplified species therein such as, e.g., hydroxyethyl cellulose, carboxymethyl cellulose, or starch – see MPEP 2123(I) and (II). Okhai discloses that chitosan is a known/suitable polysaccharide [Abstract] (polymer species within the polysaccharide genus).
Further, in addition or alternatively to the polymer of the barrier layer(s) (3) being a polysaccharide, Okhai discloses that, inter alia PVOH is a suitable polymer for forming the barrier layer(s); furthermore, PVOH is the preferred polymer disclosed by Okhai for forming the barrier layer(s) (3) [p. 8 ln. 20-24; p. 18 ln. 3-7].
Toft teaches that MFC, NFC, hemicellulose, chitosan, and other cellulose derivatives are suitably utilized in combination/mixtures with PVOH (water dispersible polymer) to form barrier layers of the multilayer food packaging material, said barrier layers deposited from dispersion or solution-based coating compositions [0123-0128]; see also [0026, 0039-0040].
Saeki – directed to multilayer paper-based barrier packaging materials and containers formed therefrom which are suitable for use with gas/oxygen-sensitive foods/liquids [0001-0002, 0020, 0022, 0035, 0072] – teaches that the barrier layer provided on one or both sides of the paper substrate layer is suitably formed from NFC in combination with PVOH resin, thereby imparting high gas barrier properties to the packaging material [0022-0024, 0045, 0027]. Saeki constitutes prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention.
In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, and given that Okhai discloses that PVOH constitutes the preferred polymer for forming the barrier layer(s) (3), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the packaging material/container of modified Okhai (set forth above in rejection of claim 1) by having utilized PVOH in combination with MFC, NFC, and/or hemicellulose, e.g., NFC, to form the barrier layer(s) (3), in order to impart high gas barrier properties to the packaging material and container as a whole, and/or because each of MFC, NFC, and hemicellulose would have been readily recognized as (i) suitable polysaccharides for formation of the barrier layer(s) (3), (ii) functionally equivalent to PVOH for said intended use, and (iii) explicitly combinable with PVOH for said intended use. See MPEP 2144.06(I), MPEP 2144.07.
In accordance with the foregoing modification, the barrier layer(s) (3) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai would have been formed from a composition including, inter alia PVOH and one or more of MFC, NFC, and hemicellulose, wherein each of MFC, NFC, and hemicellulose are polysaccharides. As such, the barrier layer(s) (3) formed from the aforesaid composition, which necessarily include at least some amount of MFC, NFC, and/or hemicellulose in combination with PVOH, read on the polysaccharide-based composition as defined by and in accordance with the limitations of claim 1; and each of the packages defined by dependent claim 3 (wherein the polysaccharide-based composition comprises hemicellulose, microfibrillar cellulose, nanofibrillar cellulose, or mixtures thereof), dependent claim 5 (wherein the polysaccharide-based composition comprises microfibrillar and/or nanofibrillar cellulose), and dependent claim 15 (wherein the polysaccharide-based composition does not comprise carboxymethyl cellulose, starch, and hydroxyethyl cellulose), respectively.
Claims 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okhai in view of Toft as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of the GAIA BioMaterials AB Product Information Brochure for Biodolomer® F, Version 1.3, October 2016 (hereinafter “GAIA ”) (previously cited, copy previously provided).
Claim 14 is rejected – in the alternative to the rejection of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 above – under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okhai in view of Toft as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of GAIA .
Regarding claim 9, as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, the sealant layer(s) (2) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai (bio-based binder coating which is coated directly on one side of said first parchment paper) are suitably formed from, inter alia polysaccharide. Okhai, as modified, is silent regarding the sealant layer(s) (2) comprising latex, wax, polylactic acid (PLA) modified polyester, or derivatives/mixtures thereof as claimed.
However, Okhai discloses that the sealant layer(s) (2) can be formed from any natural or synthetic polymer-type material, or a combination of one or more polymers and any other product [p. 6 ln. 33-36], with examples including, inter alia acrylic polymer, acrylic butadiene styrene (ABS), starch, PLA, polyolefin, polyester, and polyamide [p. 6 ln. 33–p. 7 ln. 3]. Further, the sealant layer(s) may be formed from a coating composition, typically in solution form; or may be extrusion coated, directly or by means of hot melt [p. 7 ln. 1-9; p. 11 ln. 8-14].
As such, Okhai reasonably teaches that, inter alia polyester and PLA may be utilized in combination with one another, as well as with polysaccharide if desired, to form the sealant layer(s) – see MPEP 2144.06(I) and (II), MPEP 2144.07.
GAIA teaches that Biodolomer® F is a biodegradable thermoplastic formed from renewable resources, comprising biodegradable aliphatic-aromatic copolyester, polylactic acid (PLA), and calcium carbonate [p. 1]. It is ready-grade for film extrusion and exhibits outstanding mechanical strength for thin film applications [p. 1]; it exhibits good wet strength for bag-making applications, excellent welding (i.e., bonding) properties, and is compostable [p. 2]. Biodolomer® F is also safe for food-contact in both the EU and US [p. 2], and exhibits tear-strength [p. 3]. See MPEP 2144.07. GAIA reasonably teaches that PLA and (co)polyester were known to be utilized in combination to form biodegradable films, suitable for food-safe bag-making applications, and/or that the aforesaid combination of polymers (PLA and polyester) was readily extrudable for the aforesaid intended use.
In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the packaging material/container of modified Okhai by (i) having utilized a combination of PLA and polyester, with or without polysaccharide, to form the sealant layer(s) (2); or (ii) to have utilized Biodolomer® F to form the sealant layer(s) (2). PLA and polyester would have been readily recognized as functionally equivalent materials suitable for forming said sealant layer(s) (see MPEP 2144.06(I), MPEP 2144.07); Biodolomer® F would have been readily recognized as suitable for the intended use as a bondable, compostable/biodegradable, melt-extrudable (sealant) layer in bag-making applications requiring biodegradability, as well as a PLA/polyester species within the corresponding genuses polyester and polylactic acid disclosed by Okhai as suitable for forming the sealant layer(s) (2) (see MPEP 2144.07).
In accordance with the foregoing modification (i), the sealant layer(s) (2) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai would have been formed from a combination of PLA, polyester, and optionally polysaccharide (wherein the bio-based binder coating comprises polylactic acid modified polyester, derivatives and/or mixtures thereof); or in accordance with modification (ii), would have been formed from Biodolomer® F (PLA-modified polyester) (wherein the bio-based binder coating comprises polylactic acid modified polyester). The packaging material/container of modified Okhai, in accordance with said modifications (i) or (ii), reads on the package defined by claim 9.
Regarding claim 13, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, the rejection of claim 9 above is incorporated herein by reference and reads on the package defined by claim 13.
Regarding claim 14, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, the rejection of claim 9 above, and the aforecited disclosure/teachings of Okhai and Applicant’s spec at ¶26-27 above, are incorporated herein by reference. In view of the foregoing, GAIA teaches that the Biodolomer® F layer/film may exhibit a thickness of as low as 10 µm, up to 120 µm [p. 2].
In view of the combined teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the packaging material/container of modified Okhai by having formed the sealant layer(s) (2) (bio-based binder coating) to a thickness of up to 120 µm, corresponding to a coat weight of at least 2 g/m2 [Okhai, p. 7 ln. 17-19; p. 11 ln. 17-19; p. 16 ln. 1-4, 17-18; p. 18 ln. 3-7, 20-21], in order to achieve or adjust the desired/proper/requisite degree of sealing and/or surface-smoothening of the paper substrate (1) and/or adjust the degree of oxygen barrier functionality imparted to the packaging material/container [Okhai, p. 6 ln. 24-31].
In accordance with said modification, the sealant layer(s) (2) (bio-based binder coating) of the packaging material/container of modified Okhai would have exhibited a thickness up to 120 µm, of which encompasses and thereby renders prima facie obvious the claimed binder coating thickness range of 5 to 50 µm (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okhai in view of Toft as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Heinrich (DE 19737832; “Heinrich”) (previously cited, copy previously provided).
Regarding claims 10-12, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, modified Okhai is silent regarding the packaging container being an inner-package enclosed by an outer package (claim 10).
Heinrich is directed to outer packaging/covers, e.g., safety/tamper-evident packaging for packaged food products or food containers, i.e., products which are already enclosed/contained in an inner package/container/cover [0001-0003, 0006-0007; Figs. 1-3]. The outer packaging/cover may be a thin film or films sealed to one another, formed into a gas-tight enclosure for receiving the inner package; the outer package is suitably formed from polyethylene, and is substantially transparent to allow a consumer to view the inner package therethrough [0013-0018, 0038, 0040].
The inner package may be a food container (having food disposed therein), of which may be a cuboid box or similar shape exhibiting pointed/sharp edges [0019-0020, 0042, 0052]. The outer packaging provides evidence of tampering/opening, and functions to protect the inner package from damage caused by scratching, piercing, or other mechanical damage [0006, 0040]. The interior volume of the outer package may include (with the inner package disposed therein) a gas filled therein or a vacuum pressure drawn thereupon, which escapes/expands when the outer package is breached [0007-0010], thereby indicative of tampering. Further, the outer package is suitably connected to, in a gas-tight manner (i.e., sealed to), the inner package to prevent relative shifting/movement of the inner package [0024-0025, 0059]. Heinrich constitutes prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention.
In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the food packaging container of modified Okhai (set forth above in rejection of claim 1) by having packaged said container in an outer safety packaging in accordance with the aforecited teachings of Heinrich, in order to protect the container and corresponding food product disposed in the internal volume thereof from external forces/damage, and/or to provide said container with tampering/opening indicative means to protect/ensure the safety of a consumer.
In accordance with the foregoing modification, the food packaging container of modified Okhai would have been packaged/disposed in, and connected, e.g., sealed to an outer packaging film/cover, said outer packaging formed from polyethylene. Further, the interior volume of the outer packaging would have had a gas, e.g., air filled therein, or vacuum drawn thereupon. The resultant “outer-inner food package” of modified Okhai reads on each package defined by claims 10, 11, and 12.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments presented on pp. 5-9 of the Remarks filed 04 February 2026 directed to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 previously set forth in the NFOA have been fully considered by the Examiner but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection set forth hereinabove.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Michael C. Romanowski whose telephone number is (571)270-1387. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F, 09:30-17:30.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571) 272-8935. 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.
/MICHAEL C. ROMANOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights