DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received 10/24/2025, the following rejection has been withdrawn from the previous office action:
35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 3
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 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 7,585,452, hereafter Kneer '452, supplied by applicant.
Regarding claim 1, Kneer ‘452 discloses a method of manufacturing a container having of a stiff outer container and an inner bag (inner pouch) of thermoplastic plastic materials which do not form a weld connection with one another (claim 1), the outer container including a container opening and a single wall opening in the outer container (claim 1), through which a pressure balance occurs in the gap between the inner bag and the outer container (claim 1, pressure is compensated in the space between the inner pouch and outer container), wherein a preform (parison) having at least two tubes is coextruded and is arranged between the open halves of a blow mould (claim 1), when the preform has the length necessary for the manufacture of the container, the blow mould is closed (claim 1), wherein excess material from a base region of the container to be manufactured forms a weld seam, which has a base web of welded material of the outer container (claim 1, excess is squeezed off in bottom area of container to be produced, web is formed from welded material of outer container), in which a welded base seam of the inner bag (welded bottom seam of the inner pouch) is clamped and is held in the axial direction and the preform is inflated by a pressure medium into engagement with the wall of the blow mould and is removed from the blow mould (claim 1), the method comprising the following steps:
a) removing a section of the base web of the outer container to form the single wall opening in the outer container so that a section of the base seam of the inner container is exposed to the exterior (claim 1, step b, hole formed in outer container; col 3 lines 44-45, wall opening may be formed on every portion of the outer container, such as the bottom - this would expose the base seam of the inner container to the exterior);
b) inserting a tool through the single wall opening in the outer container (claim 1, step b, drill forms hole in outer container) using a mandrel (drill is also a blow mandrel: col 2 lines 56-60, pressure medium ejected from channel at head end of drill; col 3 lines 31-35, space between inner pouch and outer container is pressure-relieved when the drill is retracted from the hole),
c) introducing a pressure medium into the opening between the base seam of the inner bag and the outer container, whereby the inner bag detaches from the outer container on both sides of the weld seam (claim 1, steps d & e, introducing pressure medium between outer container and inner pouch to detach bag from container; col 3 lines 36-39 wall openings formed at both sides of a plane comprising the bottom seam; col 3 lines 61-62 inner pouch is detached at all wall openings),
d) supplying a pressure medium into the container opening so that the inner bag again engages the outer container (claim 1, step e, introducing pressure again into the inner container to press against outer container).
Kneer ‘452 does not specifically disclose contacting and raising the exposed section of the base seam into the outer container without using the pressure medium, so that an opening is produced between the base seam of the inner bag and the outer container.
However, Kneer ‘452 does disclose introducing the pressure medium into the space between the outer container and inner pouch after full penetration of the wall of the outer container, where the drill is advanced until a first low pressure threshold is met in the inner pouch (col 2 lines 59-67), at which point the drill is controlled to stop moving forward, and the pressure medium is blown through the head of the drill until a second pressure threshold has been met (col 3 lines 1-7). The examiner notes that for a space to exist between the outer container and the inner pouch in the area of the base of the container, where the outer container and inner pouch are connected due to adhesion during coextrusion (col 1 lines 46-50), the inner pouch must be pushed away from the outer container first.
The examiner further notes the first pressure threshold value disclosed by Kneer ‘452 (Col 2, line 48-Col 3 line 18) is met when the sensor within the sealed inner bag detects a pressure change. Since the inner bag is sealed, the pressure change can only occur by deformation of the inner bag, which would affect its volume. Since the first pressure threshold value is detecting an increased pressure, this would indicate a decrease in volume of the inner bag, according to Boyle’s law. In order for the volume of the inner bag to decrease, an outside force must act on the inner bag. The only outside force in this stage of the process of Kneer ‘452 is the movement of the drill toward the inner bag. Therefore, since the first pressure threshold value depends on an outside force to act on the inner bag, the drill is pressing on the inner bag hard enough to increase the pressure therein, and meet the first pressure threshold value, thereby stopping the continued movement of the drill to prevent damage to the inner bag.
Thus, it appears such an event may be happening already in the invention of Kneer ‘452, however, if not already evident, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to modify the invention of Kneer ‘452 to use the drill head to push the inner bag up away from the bottom enough for there to be a space to blow the pressure medium to separate the inner container from the outer container.
Regarding claim 4, Kneer ‘452 further discloses wherein a central section of the base web is removed or cut away (Col 3 lines 44-55, openings may be formed on every portion of the outer container, e.g. on the bottom).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the filing date of the present invention, to form the opening in the central section of the base web of the outer container of Kneer ‘452 in order to achieve the expected result of the base seam of the inner bag being exposed to the exterior.
Regarding claim 5, Kneer ‘452 further discloses wherein compressed air is used as the pressure medium (Col 3 line 61-Col 4 line 12, compressed air).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kneer ‘452 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,276,558, hereafter Kneer '558.
Regarding claim 3, Kneer ‘452 is silent on wherein a circular cutter is used for cutting away the section of the base web of the outer container.
In the analogous art of delamination container blow molding, Kneer ‘558 discloses the use of a rotating tubular knife with an inclined flank to cut open the outer container prior to separating the inner and outer containers (col 4 lines 6-13, claim 8), the inclined hollow knife flank being advantageous in that it helps that the inner bag is not gripped by the knife and damaged, but instead is deflected inwards (col 3 lines 55-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to further modify Kneer ‘452 to use the rotating hollow knife of Kneer ‘558 in place of the drill in order to prevent the inner bag being gripped by the cutting tool, as suggested by Kneer ‘558.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's statement regarding claim 1 on page 9 of applicant's remarks that the claimed method differs from Kneer ‘452 in that the claimed method now recites that a single wall opening is formed in the wall of the container, the examiner agrees that the claim does now state this, however the claim also uses open claim language, such as comprising and including, prior to this limitation, which does not prohibit the presence of other holes while still meeting the claim limitation.
In response to applicant's statement regarding claim 1 on page 9 of applicant's remarks that Kneer ‘452 does not disclose or suggest steps (b) and (c) of amended independent claim 1 because Kneer ‘452 requires two wall openings to be formed in the container wall to detach the inner bag on both sides, the examiner notes as stated above, steps (b) and (c) are preceded by the open ended language of "the method comprising", thus the claimed method does not preclude performance of steps in addition to steps (b) and (c).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TIMOTHY HEMINGWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-0235. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6-4.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
/T.G.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754