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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9, 15, 29, 31-38, 48, 54, and 57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bothor (US 2020/0223199 A1) in view of Bethune (US 2005/0197272 A1) and Wnek (CN 104736442 A).
Regarding claims 1-2, 9, 15, and 48, Bothor discloses a sheetlike composite, especially for production of dimensionally stable food or drink product containers comprising a cellulosic board substrate (105; see Par. 0191), and wherein the cellulosic board substrate has an average transmittance (%T) in a range of 200-800 nm of 2.5% or less (see Par. 22); a metal oxide layer (108; see Par. 0163 and 0359) positioned over the cellulosic board substrate; and a tie layer (106) between the cellulosic board substrate and the metal oxide layer.
Bothor lacks a teaching of lignin content and a moisture transmission rate of less than 0.1g/m2/day.
Bethune teaches a packaging coated in a varnish for protecting it against light wherein a cellulosic board substrate has a lignin content of 4% or more by weight (see Par. 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to modify Bothor’s sheet composite to use a lignin cellulose substrate as a known substitution of materials in the art of paperboard packaging substrates.
Wnek teaches a container made of a paperboard substrate wherein a cellulosic structure has a moisture vapor transmission rate of less than 0.1 g/m2/day (see Par. 0055; Examiner considers a “moisture proof” outer layer to have a transmission rate of zero, which is less than 0.1 g/m2/day). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to further modify Bothor’s sheet composite to have a moisture proof layer in order to increase the durability of the container, as taught by Wnek.
Regarding claims 29 and 31, Bothor, as modified above, discloses a sheet wherein the tie layer comprises polyolefin (Bothor; see Par. 0181).
Regarding claims 32-33, Bothor, as modified above, discloses a sheet wherein the metal oxide layer is a metal oxide coated substrate (Bothor; see Par. 0163).
Regarding claim 34, Bothor, as modified above, discloses a sheet wherein the metal oxide coated substrate is a metal oxide coated polymer (Bothor; see Par. 0167).
Regarding claims 35-36, Bothor, as modified above, discloses a sheet wherein the metal oxide coated polymer comprises at least one of polyester or polyolefin (Bothor; see Par. 0168).
Regarding claims 37-38, Bothor, as modified above, discloses a sheet further comprising a heat seal layer (Bothor; 113; see Par. 0364) positioned over the metal oxide layer (Bothor; 110; see Par. 0181).
Regarding claim 54, Bothor, as modified above, discloses a sheet wherein the cellulosic structure has at least 80%, by weight, cellulosic content (Bethune; see Par. 0023).
Regarding claim 57, Bothor, as modified above, discloses a sheet wherein the cellulosic structure has an oxygen transmission rate of less than 0.1 cc/m2/day at 1atm (Bothor; see Par. 0174).
Claim(s) 39, 59, and 118-119 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bothor in view of Bethune and Wnek as applied to claim 37 above, and further in view of Statelman (WO 2015/0171443 A1).
Regarding claims 39, 59, and 118-119, Bothor, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention except for a heat seal layer comprising ethylene methyl acrylate. Statelman teaches a paperboard barrier structure and container comprising a distinct bottom (104) with sidewalls enclosed by a lid component (106; see Fig. 2) wherein a heat seal layer comprises ethylene methyl acrylate (see Par. 0034). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to further modify Bothor’s sheet composite to have a heat seal layer comprising ethylene methyl acrylate, as a known substitution of material in a heat seal layer taught by Statelman.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the primary reference, Bothor, fails to disclose a cellulosic board substrate transmittance, as claimed. Applicant alleges that Bothor’s transmittance is measured over an entire multi-layer composite and not for the cellulosic substrate.
-Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that the material being measured in Table 22 is cardboard and not a composite.
Applicant further contends that the prior art fails to teach a cellulosic substrate having a lignin content of “4% or more by weight”, as claimed. Applicant alleges that the teaching reference, Bethune, teaches a cardboard substrate having more than 70% by weight of conifer fibers, not 70% lignin by weight.
-Examiner is not persuaded by this argument either, as Examiner notes that conifer fibers have a substantial amount of lignin (approximately 35% of the dry mass depending on the particular conifer being used). It follows that a board made primarily of conifer fibers would have at least 4% or more weight of lignin.
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 CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE whose telephone number is (571)270-1982. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday.
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 J NEWHOUSE can be reached at (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.
/CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights