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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant amendment received on 02/26/2026:
Amendments of Claims 1, 8 and 16 are acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/19/2025 and 03/09/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement are being considered by the examiner.
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, 3, 6 to 8, 10, 13, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (US 2004/0209058) in view of Chase (2017/0341847) Tilton (US 2014/0272352) and Bangs (US 1993394).
Regarding Claims 1, 3, 8, 10 and 16:
Chou discloses a method for forming an insulated bag, the method comprising:
mixing paper fibers with binder fibers (Paragraph 0006; a paper product comprising papermaking fiber and at least one thermally bondable fiber);
disposing the mixture onto a surface to form a layer of the mixture (Paragraphs 0051 and 0052, an absorbent paper web can be made by dispersing fibers into an aqueous slurry and depositing the aqueous slurry onto the forming wire of a papermaking machine including a forming fabric);
applying heat to the mixture to form a paper fiber batt from the mixture (Paragraph 0104, Figure 1, The web is then pressed by a suction press roll (16) against the surface of a rotating Yankee dryer cylinder (26), which is heated to cause the paper to substantially dry on the Yankee dryer cylinder surface, Paragraph 0006 mentions a thermally bondable fiber);
A search for the term batt on https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/batt indicated that batt can be an often-square piece of “batting”, that was defined as “layers or sheets of raw cotton or wool or of synthetic fibrous material used for lining quilts or for stuffing or packaging also: a blanket of thermal insulation (such as fiberglass)”.
Therefore, the paper product of Chou can be considered a paper fiber batt and actually an insulation batt since the paper has some insulating characteristics, and the intended use of the claimed “batt” and of Chou is actually to make a packaging material that will have some insulation characteristics; but no insulation properties are disclosed in the claim.
Chou does not disclose adhering the paper fiber batt to a paper layer to form an insulated batt.
Chase teaches making a packaging insulation product, that can be considered an insulating batt by adhering the batt material to a water-resistant paper layer to form an insulated batt, in particular having the batt material laminated between two layers of paper sheet material (Figure 1, batt 10, and sheet material 20) The sheet material would be Kraft paper (Paragraph 0013), that would provide additional structural integrity and also is considered as impermeable to moisture and Kraft paper is also repulpable.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate to Chou the teachings of Chase and have the paper fiber batt material laminated between two layers of paper sheet material, such as Kraft paper, to give it additional structural integrity and also make it impermeable to moisture, forming what can be considered a repulpable insulated batt.
Chou discloses using the material for forming an insulated bag (Paragraph 0128, The product produced according to the present invention may be any flat paper applications. Such products include, but are not limited to, packaging materials, so it can be made into an insulated bag) that has a repulpability of greater than 85% (Paragraph 0127, the material is repulpable; and the modified insulated batt material including the teachings of Chase includes Kraft paper, that is also repulpable).
Chou does not disclose the insulated bag comprising: a pair of opposing main panels defined by the insulated batt; and a pair of opposing side panels defined by the insulated batt, each side panel attached to each main panel, the main panels and the side panels defining the bag cavity within the insulated bag.
Tilton teaches making a bag from a similar multilayer repulpable paper material that can be considered an “insulated batt”, the bag comprising a pair of opposing main panels defined by the insulated batt; and a pair of opposing side panels defined by the insulated batt, each side panel attached to each main panel, the main panels and the side panels defining a bag cavity within the insulated bag (Paragraph 0156, Figure 10, liner 70, the composite structures described herein may be formed into a container liner 70 having 4 walls and a bottom that can be considered a pair of opposing main panels a pair of opposing side panels, each side panel attached to each main panel); and the insulated batt to form the insulated bag into an I shape (Figure 10, liner 70 has an I shape as interpreted for Claim 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate to Chou the teachings of Tilton and use the paper product of Chou that is disclosed as adequate as a packaging material to make a bag as claimed since such bag is very common in the art.
The modified invention of Chou does not disclose an extended neck portion extending beyond a top end of the paper fiber batt to the bag opening; and rolling the extended neck portion toward the top end of the paper fiber batt to form a roll top seal and to enclose the bag cavity.
Bangs teaches applying a paper fiber batt to a paper layer to form an insulated batt (Figure 1, batting 3 will be considered a paper fiber batt and is applied over paper layer 1); a margin is left between the batting 3 and the edges of the paper 1 so an inner sheet of paper 2 is also applied over and caused to adhere to the bats and both layers of paper are sealed in the margins over the batting 3, that margin forms an extended neck portion (Figures 1 and 2, Column 1, line 51 to Column 2, line 3, the bag is composed of an outer and inner paper cover numbered 1 and 2 respectively. At the top open end portion of the bag, these covers are joined together by means of latex or other equivalent substance, and this joining extends downward to the point where the batting 3 is inserted between the outer and inner cover, both figures show the “extended neck portion”); to close the bag the “extended neck portion” is rolled toward the top end of the paper fiber batt to form a roll top seal and to enclose the bag cavity (Figure 5 shows the “extended neck portion” rolled toward the top end of the batting 3, Column 2, line 52 to Column 3, line 3, the top edge of the bag is rolled down to the point where the batting begins).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate to the modified invention of Chou the teachings of Bang and leave a margin between the paper fiber batt and the edges of the paper comprising the insulated bat forming an extended neck portion extending beyond a top end of the paper fiber batt to the bag opening; and rolling the extended neck portion toward the top end of the paper fiber batt as a well-known in the art way to provide for a roll top seal and to enclose the bag cavity.
Regarding Claims 6 and 13:
Chou discloses that the binder fibers are meltable PE/PP bi-component thermoplastic binder fibers (Paragraph 0056, Thermoplastic materials that may be used to form the thermally bondable fibers for use in the present invention can be chosen from one or more of the following: polyesters, polyolefins, polyolefins, polyethylene, polypropylenes…).
Regarding Claims 7 and 14:
As discussed above for Claims 6 and 13 the modified invention of Chou teaches the invention as claimed.
The modified invention of Chou does not disclose the length of the binder fibers and much less a first portion of the binder fibers has a length of about 1 mm and a second portion of the binder fibers has a length of about 6 mm.
it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the length of the binder fibers as claimed since the applicant has not disclosed that those values of binder fiber lengths has any criticality, solve any stated problem or is for any particular purpose. Additionally, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (US 2004/0209058) in view of Chase (2017/0341847), Tilton (US 2014/0272352) and Bangs (US 1993394), as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Tsujimoto (US 2003/0159777).
Regarding Claims 5 and 12:
As discussed for Claims 1 and 8 above, Chou discloses the invention as claimed, and in particular discloses (Paragraph 0126) that if the material of the paper material is heat treated during manufacturing, the thermally bondable fibers may be repulpable if specially treated to release the bonds between the thermally bondable materials and other cellulosic fibers.
Chou does not disclose specifically disclose melting the binder fibers of the insulated batt to recycle the paper fiber batt after the insulated bag has been used.
Tsujimoto teaches (Paragraph 0050) that for recycling a paper/ thermoplastic composite it is advantageous to remelt the thermoplastic resin for recycle since it can be reworked by being remelted.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate to Chou the teachings of Tsujimoto and remelt the binder fibers of the insulated batt to recycle the paper fiber batt after the insulated bag has been used if the binder fibers are made of a thermoplastic resin.
Additionally:
it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step of melting the binder fibers of the insulated batt to recycle the paper fiber batt after the insulated bag has been used has any criticality, solve any stated problem or is for any particular purpose. Note that the specification does not provide any guidance on how the step would be executed or any structure associated to such step.
Claims 2, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (US 2004/0209058) in view of Chase (2017/0341847), Tilton (US 2014/0272352) and Bangs (US 1993394), as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Moravek (US 5158371).
Regarding Claims 2 and 9:
As discussed for Claims 1 and 8 above, the modified invention of Chou discloses the invention as claimed.
The modified invention of Chou does not disclose forming an insulated panel within the bag cavity, wherein the insulated panel is sized and shaped complimentary with a horizontal cross-section of the bag cavity.
Moravek teaches adding to a similar bag a rectangular panel stiffer than the material from which the bag is constructed and shaped complimentary with a horizontal cross-section of the bag cavity to provide rigidity to the bag once it is open and standing, the panel can be considered an insulation panel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate to the modified invention of Chou the teachings of Moravek and add an insulated panel within the bag cavity, wherein the insulated panel is sized and shaped complimentary with a horizontal cross-section of the bag cavity to provide rigidity to the bag once it is open and standing.
Regarding Claim 15:
As discussed for Claim 1 above, the modified invention of Chou discloses the invention as claimed.
The modified invention of Chou does not disclose disposing a first insulated panel, a second insulated panel, and a third insulated panel within the bag cavity of the insulated bag.
Moravek teaches adding to a similar bag a rectangular panel stiffer than the material from which the bag is constructed and shaped complimentary with a horizontal cross-section of the bag cavity to provide rigidity to the bag once it is open and standing (Figure 5, rectangular rigidifying panel 16), the panel can be considered an insulation panel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate to the modified invention of Chou the teachings of Moravek and add an insulated panel within the bag cavity, wherein the insulated panel is sized and shaped complimentary with a horizontal cross-section of the bag cavity to provide rigidity to the bag once it is open and standing. Adding additional panels can be considered obvious duplication of parts.
As already discussed for Claim 1, the modified invention of Chou discloses that each insulated panel comprises a first sheet, a second sheet, and an insulation batt, in particular the teachings of Chase were used to modify Chou and making the paper fiber batt material of Chou laminated between two layers of paper sheet material, such as Kraft paper, to give it additional structural integrity and also make it impermeable to moisture, forming what can be considered a repulpable insulated batt.
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (US 2004/0209058) in view of Chase (2017/0341847), Tilton (US 2014/0272352) and Bangs (US 1993394), as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Toshiya (JP 2005/139582).
Regarding Claims 4 and 11:
As discussed above for Claims 1 and 8 the modified invention of Chou teaches the invention as claimed.
The modified invention of Chou does not disclose wherein the paper fiber batt has paper reinforcement fibers interlocked with about 2% to about 25% by weight of the meltable PE/PP bi-component thermoplastic binder fiber.
Toshiya teaches a method for producing a molded body for a packaging material in a process in which pulp fibers and binder fibers are mixed, subjected to heat treatment to melt the binder fibers to obtain an excellent buffering action, the method comprises 51 to 95% by weight for pulp fibers and 5 to 49% by weight for binder fibers. Note that a range of above 15% of binder fibers would nominally result on a non repulpable product.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate to the modified invention of Chou the teachings of Toshiya and have the paper reinforcement fibers in the claimed range to obtain an excellent buffering action and also a repulpable product.
Additionally:
it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include paper reinforcement fibers interlocked with about 2% to about 25% by weight of the meltable PE/PP bi-component thermoplastic binder fiber to the paper fiber batt, since the specification does not indicate that the limitation has any criticality, the paper reinforcement fibers solve any stated problem or it serve for any particular purpose.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of the amended claims over Chou (US 2004/0209058) in view of Chase (2017/0341847), Tilton (US 2014/0272352) and Gerard (US 2148454), as used in the last office action have been considered but are moot because the amendment required “an extended neck portion extending beyond a top end of the paper fiber batt to the bag opening; and rolling the extended neck portion toward the top end of the paper fiber batt to form a roll top seal and to enclose the bag cavity.” The Examiner replaced the reference Gerard (US 2148454) for Bangs (US 1993394), already on the record and mentioned on the last office action as a relevant reference, that teaches precisely that limitation as interpreted. The Examiner notes that closing a bag by rolling the open top of the bag “downwards” is a very common practice in the art, and the new reference cited provide each examples of those teachings.
The Examiner highly recommends to set an interview at the Applicants convenience to discuss any subject relevant to this application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In particular D’Este (US 1899892) teach making an insulated bat similar to Bangs (US 1993394), with paper layers forming edges to seal inside an insulation formed of waste paper, and also closed by rolling the extended neck; and also, all the new reference cited teach closing bags by rolling an extended neck.
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 EDUARDO R FERRERO whose telephone number is (571)272-9946. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-7:00.
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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
/EDUARDO R FERRERO/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
/ROBERT F LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731