Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/901,531

SIDE GUSSET PAPER CONTAINER, METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SIDE GUSSET PAPER CONTAINER AND USE OF THE SIDE GUSSET PAPER CONTAINER

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Sep 01, 2022
Examiner
NEWHOUSE, NATHAN JEFFREY
Art Unit
3734
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mettler Packaging LLC
OA Round
5 (Final)
16%
Grant Probability
At Risk
6-7
OA Rounds
4y 5m
To Grant
20%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 16% of cases
16%
Career Allow Rate
23 granted / 140 resolved
-53.6% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 5m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
164
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.1%
+4.1% vs TC avg
§102
27.9%
-12.1% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 140 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on 15 August 2025 has been entered. 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, 6, 7, 9-14, 16, 17, 19, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Japanese Document No. 2000-85790 to Aoki (hereafter Aoki) and WIPO Document No. 2011/042774 Zanarella et al. (hereafter Zanarella). Regarding claim 1, Aoki discloses the claimed invention, especially a side gusset paper bag comprising a continuous fold (10) extending widthwise of front wall (5), rear wall (6), and left and right pleats (7, 7; machine translation paragraph [0036]; Fig. 10) formed in advance at a base paper stage before each part of the bag is formed (machine translation paragraph [0037]), wherein a pressure between a product and a floor (11) causes a bottom end (4b) of the paper bag including a closure portion (4 comprising folded portion 4a, front wall lower end portion 5a, rear wall lower end portion 6a, and gussets bonded together; Figs. 5 and 6) to bend at the fold (10), resulting in the formation of a bottom lid portion (43) at the bottom end (4b) of the paper bag (machine translation paragraph [0036]; Fig. 11), wherein during use, an upper container edge of the front wall (5) lies below an upper container edge of the rear wall (machine translation paragraph [0027]; Figs. 1-2), which meets the recitation “ wherein the front wall along a first folding edge transitions in one piece into a first part of the container bottom region with a first outer edge, and in the region of the first folding edge or at the first folding edge, there is a first pre-crease, wherein the rear wall along a second folding edge transitions in one piece into a second part of the container bottom region with a second outer edge, and in the region of the second folding edge or at the second folding edge, there is a second pre-crease, wherein the first side wall along a third folding edge transitions in one piece into a third part of the container bottom region, and in the region of the third folding edge or at the third folding edge, there is a third pre-crease, wherein the second side wall along a fourth folding edge transitions in one piece into a fourth part of the container bottom region, and in the region of the fourth folding edge or at the fourth folding edge, there is a fourth pre-crease, wherein the first, second, third, and fourth pre-crease represent pre-prepared pre-creases, and wherein the first, second, third, and fourth folding edges formed subsequently in the region of the first, second, third, and fourth pre-creases respectively, wherein during use, the upper container edge of the front wall lies below the upper container edge of the rear wall, wherein the first part of the container bottom region has a greater extension away from the transition of the front wall into the first part of the container bottom region than the second part of the container bottom region having an extension away from the transition of the rear wall into the second part of the container bottom region, and wherein in the container bottom region a single transverse fold line is provided, which extends in the region of the first part of the container bottom region spaced apart from the first outer edge, and in the region of the second part of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge, and in the region of the third part of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge, and in the region of the fourth part of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge, the transverse fold line being spaced more closely to the second outer edge than to the first outer edge”. Further regarding claim 1, Aoki discloses a first carrier handle (2) having attached portions (2a) that are attached to an inner container side of the front wall (5), the first carrier handle having a first lateral width between its attached portions (Figs. 1 and 8-10), wherein the front wall has a lateral width between its opposite longitudinal folding edges that wider the first lateral width of the first carrier handle; and a second carrier handle (2) having attached portions that are attached to the inner container side of the rear wall (6), the second carrier handle having a second lateral width between its attached portions (Figs. 1 and 8-10), wherein the rear wall has a lateral width between its opposite longitudinal folding edges that wider the second lateral width of the second carrier handle. Aoki discloses the paper bag is manufactured from a bag base material (91) depicted in a flat and unassembled state in Fig. 4. Aoki further discloses the handles (2, 2) attached to predetermined location on the bag material (91; machine translation paragraph [0029]). It is considered the structure of the handles (2, 2), and the attachment of the handles (2, 2) to the bag base material (91) in Aoki, as discussed above, meets the structure implied by the product-by-process recitation “ wherein, in a flat unassembled state, the front and rear walls each have a lateral width between their opposite longitudinal folding edges that is at least as wide as the first and second lateral widths of the first and second…carrier handles, respectively, the front and rear walls being arranged such that the first and second…carrier handles are attached to the inner container sides of the front and rear walls substantially simultaneously, and such that, during use, the first and second…carrier handles are symmetrically attached.” However, Aoki does not disclose the carrier handles (2, 2) are paper. Zanarella teaches that it is known in the art to use paper for carrier handles in an analogous side gusset paper bag (page 4, lines 22-25). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use paper for the carrier handles in the Aoki side gusset paper bag, as in Zanarella, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. Regarding claim 6, the bottom end (4b) and fold (10) in the side gusset paper bag of Aoki, as discussed above, meets the structure implied by the functional recitation “wherein the first part of the container bottom region forms a substantially rectangular base area.” Regarding claim 7, Aoki discloses the first part of the container bottom region (front wall lower end 5a below fold 10) has a greater extension away from the first folding edge (10) than the second part of the container bottom region (rear wall lower end 6a below fold 10) having an extension away from the second folding edge (Figs. 5-7 and 10). Regarding claim 9, Aoki discloses a continuous fold (10) extending widthwise of front wall (5), rear wall (6), and left and right pleats (7, 7; machine translation paragraph [0036]; Fig. 10), wherein a height (h) of the fold (10) coincides with the upper edge of the bent portion (4a) of the closure portion (machine translation paragraph [0038]), and the first part of the container bottom region (front wall lower end 5a below fold 10) has a greater extension away from the first folding edge (10) than the second part of the container bottom region (rear wall lower end 6a below fold 10) having an extension away from the second folding edge (Figs. 5-7 and 10), which meets the recitation “wherein the first part of the container bottom region is configured to extend substantially up to or adjacent to the transition of the rear wall into the second part of the container bottom region.” Regarding claim 10, Aoki discloses a continuous fold (10) extending widthwise of front wall (5), rear wall (6), and left and right pleats (7, 7; machine translation paragraph [0036]; Fig. 10), wherein a height (h) of the fold (10) coincides with the upper edge of the bent portion (4a) of the closure portion (machine translation paragraph [0038]), and the first part of the container bottom region (front wall lower end 5a below fold 10) has a greater extension away from the first folding edge (10) than the second part of the container bottom region (rear wall lower end 6a below fold 10) having an extension away from the second folding edge (Figs. 5-7 and 10), which meets the recitation “wherein the first part of the container bottom region is configured to be joined adjacent to the transition of the rear wall to the second part of the container bottom region on the inside to the second part of the container bottom region.” Regarding claim 11, Aoki discloses a continuous fold (10) extending widthwise of front wall (5), rear wall (6), and left and right pleats (7, 7; machine translation paragraph [0036]; Fig. 10), wherein the front wall (5), rear wall (6), first side wall (7), and second side wall (7) and the first, second, third and fourth part of the container bottom region (portions of front, rear, and side walls below continuous fold 10) are formed in one piece. Regarding claim 12, Aoki discloses a height (h) of the fold (10) coincides with the upper edge of the bent portion (4a) of the closure portion (machine translation paragraph [0038]). Therefore, the first part of the container bottom region (front wall lower end 5a below fold 10) in Aoki is single layered or mostly single layered (Figs. 5-7). Regarding claim 13, Aoki discloses a height (h) of the fold (10) coincides with the upper edge of the bent portion (4a) of the closure portion (machine translation paragraph [0038]). Therefore, the second part of the container bottom region (rear wall lower end 6a below fold 10) is configured to form or cover substantially no more than half the area or substantially half the area of the container bottom region (Figs. 5, 6, and 7(a)). Regarding claim 14, Aoki discloses a height (h) of the fold (10) equal to the depth (d) of the pleats (machine translation paragraph [0036]). Therefore, a distance of the first outer edge (of folded portion 4a) from the first pre-crease (fold 10 in front wall 5) is substantially in the region of half the width to the width of the first and/or second side wall (7) and/or wherein a distance of the second outer edge (edge of rear wall lower end 6a spaced from the fold of closure portion 4; Figs. 5-6) from the second pre-crease (fold 10 in rear wall 6) is substantially in the region of a third of the width to two thirds of the width of the first and/or second side wall (7). Regarding claim 16, Aoki and Zanarella disclose the claimed invention, as discussed above. Aoki further discloses a reinforcing layer (21) in the region of the attachment (2a) of the first paper carrier handle (2) to the front wall (5) and a reinforcing layer (21) in the region of the attachment (2a) of the second paper carrier handle (2) to the rear wall (6; machine translation paragraph [0033]). Regarding claim 17, Aoki and Zanarella disclose the claimed invention, as discussed above, except for the paper having a grammage in the range of 30 g/m2 to 120 g/m2. Zanarella teaches that it is known in the art to use paper with a basic weight at least exceeding 90 g/m2 (page 3, lines 6-10; which is encompassed by the claimed range “30 g/m2 to 120 g/m2”). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a paper having a grammage in the range of 30 g/m2 to 120 g/m2 for the Aoki side gusset paper bag, as in Zanarella, in order to guarantee a required strength and resistance for the bag. Regarding claim 19, Aoki discloses the transverse fold line (at closure portion 4 comprising folded portion 4a, front wall lower end portion 5a, rear wall lower end portion 6a, and gussets bonded together; Figs. 5-6) extends continuously: in the region of the first part (front wall lower end 5a below fold 10) of the container bottom region spaced apart from the first outer edge (outer edge of folded portion 4a; Figs. 5-6) substantially parallel or parallel to the first outer edge in the region between the first and second side walls (Figs. 1 and 8-10), or which extends in the region of the first part (front wall lower end 5a below fold 10) of the container bottom region spaced apart from the first outer edge (outer edges of folded portion 4a; Figs. 5-6) substantially parallel or parallel to the first outer edge (outer edge of folded portion; Figs. 5-6), and in the region of the second part (rear wall lower end 6a below fold 10) of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge (edge of rear wall lower end 6a spaced from the fold of closure portion 4; Figs. 5-6) substantially parallel or parallel to the first outer edge (outer edge of folded portion 4a; Figs. 5-6), and in the region of the third part (lower end of gusset 7 below fold 10) of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge (edge of rear wall lower end 6a spaced from the fold of closure portion 4; Figs. 5-6) substantially parallel or parallel to the first outer edge (outer edge of folded portion 4a; Figs. 5-6), and in the region of the fourth part (lower end of gusset 7 below fold 10) of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge (edge of rear wall lower end 6a spaced from the fold of closure portion 4; Figs. 5-6) substantially parallel or parallel to the first outer edge (outer edge of folded portion 4a; Figs. 5-6). Regarding claim 25, Aoki discloses using the side gusset paper bag as carrying and fillable container. Moreover, Aoki and Zanarella meet the claimed structure of the side gusset paper bag, as discussed above, thus meeting the structure implied by the functional recitation “which is self-standing in an unfilled state.” Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Japanese Document No. 2000-85790 to Aoki (hereafter Aoki) and WIPO Document No. 2011/042774 Zanarella et al. (hereafter Zanarella) as applied in claim 1, and further in view of Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0334080 to Campbell (hereafter Campbell). Regarding claim 18, Aoki and Zanarella disclose the claimed invention, as discussed above, except for the paper of the front wall, rear wall, first side wall and second side wall and of the first, second, third and fourth part of the container bottom region being laminated on the inside and/or outside or being provided with a sealing lacquer. Campbell teaches that it is known in the art to laminate on inner surface (26) and outer surface (24) of a blank (20) in an analogous side gusseted paper bag (paragraph [0039]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to laminate the inside and outside of the blank in the side gusset paper bag of Aoki, as in Campbell (thus meeting the recitation “wherein the paper of the front wall, rear wall, first side wall and second side wall and of the first, second, third and fourth part of the container bottom region is laminated on the inside and/or outside or is provided with a sealing lacquer”), in order to provide an aesthetic effect. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 15 August 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant remarks Aoki fails to describe or suggest an embodiment in which a single transverse fold line is located in the container bottom region spaced apart from the first and second outer edges because Fig. 7(a) of Aoki shows the stepped flap (32) is folded upward and attached to the back wall (6a) and Fig. 7(b) of Aoki requires multiple folds in the container. In response, it is brought to applicant’s attention that each of Figs. 5 and 6 in Aoki depict the front wall lower end (5a), the rear wall lower end (6a) and the gussets are bent along a single fold line resulting in a portion of the rear wall lower end (6a) lying against itself and an outer edge of the stepped flap of the front wall lower end (5a) extending beyond an outer edge of the portion of the rear wall lower end (6a) lying against itself. Therefore, it is maintained Aoki meets the recitation “wherein in the container bottom region a single transverse fold line is provided, which transverse fold line extends in the region of the first part of the container bottom region spaced apart from the first outer edge, and in the region of the second part of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge, and in the region of the third part of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge, and in the region of the fourth part of the container bottom region spaced apart from the second outer edge, the transverse fold line being spaced more closely to the second outer edge than to the first outer edge”. 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. Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references.” A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 714.02 and MPEP 2163.06. The “disclosure” includes the claims, the specification and the drawings. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JES F PASCUA whose telephone number is (571)272-4546. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 9:00 am - 5:00 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, Nathan Newhouse can be reached on 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. /JES F PASCUA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 01, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 24, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 29, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 23, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 26, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 27, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 28, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 03, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
May 29, 2025
Interview Requested
Jun 17, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 17, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 29, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 29, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589914
RESILIENT BAG CLOSURE STRIP AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12564275
PET SLING CARRIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12538976
METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND APPARATUSES FOR DETACHABLY MOUNTING WEARABLE DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12478172
BELT DEVICE FOR CARRYING A HOLSTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12427930
FIXING DEVICE FOR ON-VEHICLE NECK PILLOW
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 30, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
16%
Grant Probability
20%
With Interview (+4.1%)
4y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 140 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month