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 .
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 10, 12, 14-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 6349829 Matheis et al. (Matheis).
Regarding claim 1, Matheis teaches carrier (card package 10) comprising: (a) a first panel (16); (b) an opposing second panel (17) secured to the first panel by an adhesive (adhesive pattern 58; column 7, lines 23-25) disposed between the first panel (16) and the second panel (17) near a periphery of the carrier (10) to form a pocket between the first panel and the second panel; and (c) scoring (perforation line 34a-c) along the first panel (16), the second panel (17), or both the first panel (16) and the second panel (17) that is aligned with the adhesive (58; figures 3-4; column 7, line 51-column 8, line 4), wherein the scoring (perforation line 34c) is configured to disassembles (remove of tear-off strips 56) to visually indicates the carrier has been tampered with in response to separation of the first panel (16) and the second panel (17).
PNG
media_image1.png
460
372
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
262
366
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Matheis teaches the scoring (perforation line 34c) is located along one of the first panel (16) and the second panel (17).
Regarding claim 4, Matheis teaches the scoring (perforation line 34a-c) is located on both the first panel and the second panel (see figure 3-4 and 7-8).
Regarding claim 10, Matheis teaches the first panel (16) and the second panel (17) are monolithically formed and hinged to each other by a fold line (54) such that the first panel and the second panel are folded onto each other along the fold line to create the carrier (column 5, lines 59-62 and claim 1).
Regarding claim 12, Matheis teaches the carrier is a paperboard (column 4, line 54-55 and column 1, line 32-34).
Regarding claim 14, Matheis teaches the scoring is configured to disassemble such that the carrier is unable to be reassembled after the carrier has been tampered with (once tear strips 56 are torn from the package, the tear strips can’t be reattached).
Regarding claim 15, Matheis teaches the scoring (34a-c) is located near a peripheral edge of the first panel (16), the second panel (17) or both the first panel and the second panel, and wherein a central area of the first panel and the second panel that form the pocket is free of scoring.
Regarding claim 16, Matheis teaches the first panel (16) and the second panel (17) are coextensive.
Regarding claim 18, Matheis teaches pocket formed between the first panel (16) and the second panel (17) of the carrier is configured to hold a prepaid card (12).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20090107862 to Pascua et al. (Pascua) in view of US 6349829 Matheis et al. (Matheis).
Regarding claim 1, Pascua teaches carrier (stored value card and carrier system 100) comprising: (a) a first panel (130); (b) an opposing second panel (140) secured to the first panel by an adhesive (adhesive may be placed at a plurality of locations between panels 130 and 140, in portions 190, 191 and 192, ¶0029) disposed between the first panel (130) and the second panel (140) near a periphery of the carrier (100) to form a pocket between the first panel and the second panel; and (c) scoring (lines of weakness 155, 150 and 170, ¶0031) along the first panel (130), the second panel (140), or both the first panel (130) and the second panel (140), wherein the scoring (lines of weakness 155, 150 and 170) is configured to disassembles (removal of portions 190, 191 and 192, ¶0031) to visually indicates the carrier has been tampered with in response to separation of the first panel (130) and the second panel (140).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Bay door)]
PNG
media_image3.png
360
564
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Although Pascua teaches the adhesive may be placed at a plurality of locations between panels 130 and 140, in portions 190, 191 and 192, (¶0029), Pascua does not specifically teach scoring along the first panel, the second panel, or both the first panel and the second panel that is aligned with the adhesive.
Matheis teaches scoring (perforation line 34a-c) along the first panel (16), the second panel (17), or both the first panel (16) and the second panel (17) that is aligned with the adhesive (58; figures 3-4; column 7, line 51-column 8, line 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adhesive of the construct carrier (stored value card and carrier system 100) taught by Pascua aligned with the scoring/perforations as taught by Matheis with a reasonable expectation of success to provide a means for a clean separation of the tear away portions from the remainder of the carrier.
Regarding claim 2, Pascua teaches the scoring (perforation line 34c) is located along one of the first panel (16) and the second panel (17).
Regarding claim 6, Pascua teaches a bay door is formed along the first panel (130) by perforations (170, 150 and 155) and the bay door opens along a fold line (135) by separating the perforations (figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Pascua teaches a tab (175) located along a peripheral edge of the bay door, the tab (175) being configured to initiate separation of the perforations (170) upon being pulled.
Regarding claim 15, Pascua teaches the scoring (lines of weakness 155, 150 and 170) is located near a peripheral edge of the first panel (130), the second panel (140) or both the first panel and the second panel, and wherein a central area of the first panel and the second panel that form the pocket is free of scoring.
Claims 8-9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20090107862 to Pascua et al. (Pascua) in view of US 6349829 Matheis et al. (Matheis) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of US 10329067 to Glinert et al. (Glinert).
Regarding claim 8, Pascua does not teach an access panel abutting the bay door.
Glinert teaches a security package comprising a first panel (14) and second panel (12) secured to the first panel (14) by an adhesive (column 3, line 46-48 and column 11, line 53--62) disposed between the first panel (14) and the second panel (12). Glinert also teaches a bay door (tear-off window 30) is formed along the first panel (12) by perforations (not labeled) and the bay door (30) and an access panel (tear-off strip 28) formed to abuts the bay door (30) along the perforations and the access panel (32) opens simultaneously with the bay door (30), independently of the bay door (30), or both (column 8, line 22-27).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Perforations or
tear lines)]
PNG
media_image4.png
258
504
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct carrier taught by Pascua with an access panel as taught by Glinert with a reasonable expectation of success to provide provides a visual and/or tactile indicator to a customer and/or salesperson of possible tampering of the packaging and/or a compromised insert member (column 8, line 36-38).
Regarding claim 9, Glinert teaches the access panel (28) includes a cutout (activation window 32) aligned with an item (insert member 16) located in the pocket of the carrier.
Regarding claim 13, Glinert teaches a tab (tear off strip 30, see annotated figure above) located along a peripheral edge of the bay door, the tab (30) being configured to initiate separation of the perforations (not labeled) upon being pulled, wherein the tab (30) extends to or beyond a peripheral edge of the first panel and is free of adhesive, scoring, or both.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6349829 Matheis et al. (Matheis) in view of US 20080168690 to Wagenknecht et al. (Wagenknecht).
Regarding claim 11, Matheis does not teach the fold line is a partial cut through a thickness of the first panel and the second panel.
Wagenknecht teaches a folding hand held sign display comprising fold lines (hinge line 20), wherein the fold lines are formed with partial through cut slits (¶0093). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct carrier (card package 10) taught by Matheis with partial through cut slits as taught by Wagenknecht with a reasonable expectation of success to provide means to facilitate folding of the panels.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 3, the prior art of record does not teaches a carrier for a card comprising a first and second panel adhered together near the periphery of the carrier to form a pocket and scoring along the first and second panels that is aligned with the adhesive, wherein the scoring is configured to disassemble to visually indicate the carrier has been tampered with in response to separation of the first panel and the second panel as recited in claim 1 and further wherein the scoring is located along the second panel to overlie all portions of the carrier at which adhesive is disposed.
Regarding claim 5, the prior art of record does not teaches a carrier for a card comprising a first and second panel adhered together near the periphery of the carrier to form a pocket and scoring along the first and second panels that is aligned with the adhesive, wherein the scoring is configured to disassemble to visually indicate the carrier has been tampered with in response to separation of the first panel and the second panel as recited in claim 1 and further wherein the scoring is a pattern forming a plurality of substantially diamond shapes configured to disconnect from one another, the first panel, the second panel, or a combination thereof in response to separation of the first panel and the second panel.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art of record does not teaches a carrier for a card comprising a first and second panel adhered together near the periphery of the carrier to form a pocket and scoring along the first and second panels that is aligned with the adhesive, wherein the scoring is configured to disassemble to visually indicate the carrier has been tampered with in response to separation of the first panel and the second panel as recited in claim 1 and further wherein the adhesive is free of extension beyond the periphery of the carrier and the pocket is free of the adhesive.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, 10, 12, 14-16, and 18 as being anticipated by US 6349829 Matheis et al. (Matheis). The applicant argues “in Matheis, adhesive 58 is disposed on the first panel 16, and not between the first panel 16 and the second panel 17.”
The examiner disagrees.
Matheis teaches “the adhesive pattern 58 is applied along side edges 60 and 61 of the respective panels and along the non-folded ends 63 and 64 of the panels to adhere the panels 16 and 17 to one another to encase the card within the package assembly.” The examiner contends when the panel 16 is adhered to panel 17, the adhesive 58 is between the panels.
The rejection is maintained.
Regarding the rejection of claims 1, 2,6, 7, and 15 as being anticipated by US 20090107862 to Pascua, the applicant argues “Pascua discloses that adhesive is applied in portions 190, 191, and 192. The arguments are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1, 2,6, 7, and 15 as being anticipated by US 20090107862 to Pascua is withdrawn in view the new grounds of rejection stated above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASSANDRA DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6642. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM-4:30 PM.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 571-272-8227. 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.
/CASSANDRA DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631