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 .
The amendments filed 2/19/2026 have been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-22, 24, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 11 newly recite the limitations “wherein the liner height of the second portion of the first thermal liner is at least equal to the box height” and “the liner height of the first thermal liner is at least equal to the box height”. However, these limitations are not supported by the original disclosure. Paragraph 0034 of the original specification recites “As shown in FIG. 2, the height of the outer box 102 is greater than or equal to the height of the back fold 144 of the first thermal liner 106 and the height of the back fold 144 of the first thermal liner 106 is greater than or equal to the height of the second thermal liner 108”, however this passage does not define “the height of the back fold” as being measured between the bend lines 148 and 150 (paragraph 0024), shown in Applicant’s Figures 1 and 2, where said bend lines are shown on the inner surface of the thermal liner and shown specifically has having a height less than that of the outer surface of the back fold 144, and thereby also less than a height of the box, and cannot be interpreted as claimed. Paragraph 0024 of Applicant’s disclosure does define “A distance from the first bend line 148 to the second bend line 150 defines a height of the back fold 144. In various embodiments, the height of the back fold 144 is less than or equal to the height of the outer box 102”, however this passage only teaches the height between the bend lines as being “less than or equal to the height of the outer box 102”, which is different than the claimed liner height being “at least equal to the box height” which is a non-supported range which would appear to claim liner heights equal to and greater than the box height. Applicants Fig. 7 depicts a cross-sectional view of the liner within the box, but fails to denote where the bend lines are on the liner, and it would appear that due to the bending, liner back fold 144 has an inner height which is less than an outer height, the inner height being apparently defined by the distance between bend lines as in Fig. 1, which must be less than the outer back fold height and box height contrary to the new limitations. Therefore the limitations cannot be further considered on the merits.
[AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Height intended to be “at least equal” to box height)][AltContent: textbox (Height between bend lines on inner surface of liner)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
257
435
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Box Height)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Height between bend lines on inner surface of liner)]
PNG
media_image2.png
440
572
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 6,938,968 (Tanimoto et al. hereinafter) and US PG Pub No. 2007/0051782 (Lantz, of record).
In re claim 1, with reference to Figs. 1, 2 and 5, Tanimoto et al. discloses: An insulated packaging assembly comprising: a first thermal liner defining a top end, a bottom end, a first bend line, and a second bend line, a first portion, second portion defining a liner height between the first bend line and thee second bend line, and third portion; and a second thermal liner, the second thermal liner comprising a single piece of insulation material (Fig. 1 shows single piece of core 2) at least partially defining each of the first portion of the second thermal liner, the second portion of the second thermal liner, and the third portion of the second thermal liner (see Figs. 1, 2, and 5 below) (see Fig. 10 showing an assembly comprising multiple liners 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
355
453
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Inner Surface)]
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First End)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First End)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First Portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Second Portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Third Portion)]
[AltContent: textbox (2nd Bend Line)][AltContent: textbox (1st Bend Line)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image4.png
173
375
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Inner Surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image5.png
314
316
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Tanimoto et al. fails to disclose a box comprising a box top end, a box bottom end, a top side wall, a bottom side wall, a first lateral side wall, a second lateral side wall, a third lateral side wall, and a fourth lateral side wall, the box defining a cavity and a box height from the box top end to the box bottom end, a first portion of the first thermal liner positioned in contact with the top side wall, a second portion of the first thermal liner positioned in contact with the first lateral side wall, a third portion of the first thermal liner positioned in contact with the bottom side wall, a first portion of the second thermal liner positioned in contact with the second lateral side wall, a second portion of the second thermal liner positioned in contact with the third lateral side wall, a third portion of the second thermal liner positioned in contact with the fourth lateral side wall.
However, Lantz discloses a box comprising a box top end, a box bottom end, having a top wall (14a-d), a bottom side wall (See Fig. 3), a first lateral side wall, a second lateral side wall, a third lateral side wall, and a fourth lateral side wall (14), the box defining a cavity (18), a first portion (26) of a first thermal liner (lower 20a in Fig. 3) positioned in contact with the top side wall, a second portion (24) of the first thermal liner positioned in contact with the first lateral side wall, a third portion (26) of the first thermal liner positioned in contact with the bottom side wall, a second thermal liner positioned in the cavity (upper 20a in Fig. 3) and contacting and defining an insulated cavity with the first thermal liner (placement of upper 20a onto lower 20a as shown in Fig. 3 enacting contact, creating the insulated cavity when placed and sized as taught by paragraph 0040), a first portion (22) of a second thermal liner (upper 20a in Fig.3) positioned in contact with the second lateral side wall, a second portion (24) of the second thermal liner positioned in contact with the third lateral side wall (26), a third portion of the second thermal liner positioned in contact with the fourth lateral side wall (See Figs. 3 and 6, paragraph 0027).
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Box Height)][AltContent: textbox (Box Top End)][AltContent: textbox (Box Bottom End)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image6.png
663
464
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided a box with a cavity to hold the liners of Tanimoto et al. as taught by Lantz for the purposes of providing external protection to a shipment and rigidity to the liners to facilitate handling (Lantz, paragraph 0024).
In re claim 2, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the second thermal liner comprises an outer covering (3) at least partially encapsulating the single piece of insulation material (See Fig. 2).
In re claim 3, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the outer covering fully encapsulates the single piece of insulation material (see Fig. 2).
In re claim 4, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the outer covering comprises a polymer (column 9, lines 14-24).
In re claim 5, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the single piece of insulation material is a single piece of nonwoven insulation material (column 9, lines 3-13).
In re claim 6, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the single piece of insulation material is resilient (glass fibers of core 2 have inherent resiliency).
In re claim 7, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the second thermal liner is in a folded configuration within the cavity, and wherein the second thermal liner defines a C- shape in the folded configuration (as in combination in re claim 1 above, see Fig. 3).
In re claim 8, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the second thermal liner defines a first end and a second end, wherein the single piece of insulation material extends from the first end to the second end (see Fig. 2 above).
In re claim 9, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the first thermal liner defines an inner surface and an outer surface, and wherein the outer surface is positioned in contact with the box (See Fig. 3 above), and wherein the first bend line and the second bend line are positioned on the inner surface.
In re claim 11, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses: A method of assembling an insulated packaging assembly, the method comprising: positioning a first thermal liner inside of a cavity defined by a box (paragraph 0027), the box comprising a box top end, a box bottom end, a first lateral side wall, a second lateral side wall, a third lateral side wall, a fourth lateral side wall, and a bottom side wall, and defining a box height from the box top end to the box bottom end (as in re claim1 above); and positioning a second thermal liner in the cavity and contacting the first thermal liner to define an insulated cavity with the first thermal liner (as interpreted above), a first portion of the second thermal liner positioned in contact with the second lateral side wall, a second portion of the second thermal liner positioned in contact with the third lateral side wall, a third portion of the second thermal liner positioned in contact with the fourth lateral side wall, the second thermal liner comprising a single piece of insulation material at least partially defining each of the first portion of the second thermal liner, the second portion of the second thermal liner, and the third portion of the second thermal liner, wherein: the first thermal liner defines a top end, a bottom end, a first bend line, a second bend line, a first portion of the first thermal liner, a second portion of the first thermal liner defining a liner height between the first bend line and the second bend line and positioned in contact with the first lateral side wall, and a third portion of the first thermal liner positioned in contact with the bottom side wall (as in re claim 1 above).
In re claim 12, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the second thermal liner defines a first end and a second end, and wherein the single piece of insulation material extends from the first end to the second end (as in re claim 8 above).
In re claim 13, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the second thermal liner comprises an outer covering; and wherein the outer covering at least partially encapsulates the single piece of insulation material (as in re claim 2 above).
In re claim 14, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the outer covering comprises a polymer (as in re claim 4 above).
In re claim 15, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the single piece of insulation material is resilient (as in re claim 6 above), and wherein positioning the second thermal liner in the cavity comprises folding the second thermal liner from an unfolded configuration to a folded configuration (See figs. 2 and 5 of Tanimoto et al. above, as well as Fig. 3 of Lantz).
In re claim 16, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the second thermal liner defines a C-shape in the folded configuration (as in re claim 1 above, also see Lantz paragraph 0027).
In re claim 17, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein folding the second thermal liner from the unfolded configuration to the folded configuration comprises folding the single piece of insulation material (see Figs 3 and 5 above).
In re claim 19, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the single piece of insulation material is a single piece of nonwoven insulation material (as in re claim 5 above).
Claim(s) 10, 18, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Folkert et al. (of record).
In re claim 10, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention except a container positioned within the cavity, the container positioned in contact with an inner surface of the second thermal liner.
However, with reference to Fig. 2, Folkert et al. discloses an insulated container wherein an inner container (50) is positioned within a cavity and snugly surrounded by insulated panels (paragraph 0030).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided an inner container contacting the inner surfaces of the insulation to the assembly of Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz as further taught by Folkert et al. for the purposes of facilitating handling of stored/shipped contents by allowing for simple insertion and removal of temperature-regulated contents before and after shipment (Folkert et al., paragraphs 0025 and 0030).
In re claim 18, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention except wherein a container in the cavity with the first thermal liner and the second thermal liner positioned between the container and the box.
However, with reference to Fig. 2, Folkert et al. discloses an insulated container wherein an inner container (50) is positioned within a cavity and snugly surrounded by insulated panels (paragraph 0030).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided an inner container contacting the inner surfaces of the insulation to the assembly of Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz as further taught by Folkert et al. for the purposes of facilitating handling of stored/shipped contents by allowing for simple insertion and removal of temperature-regulated contents before and after shipment (Folkert et al., paragraphs 0025 and 0030).
In re claim 22, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention except wherein the box comprises a front locking flap comprising a bend line that separates the front locking flap into a base panel and a locking panel.
However, with reference to Fig. 1, Folkert et al. discloses an insulated container wherein the box (10) comprises a front locking flap (25/28/27) comprising a bend line (70) that separates the front locking flap into a base panel (25) and a locking panel (28).
PNG
media_image7.png
569
528
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided a “bend line” that separates a front locking flap into a front panel and a base panel to the assembly of Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz as further taught by Folkert et al. for the purposes of providing offset meeting lines to help square up the box and make it more difficult for air and dust to penetrate inside the box (Folkert et al. paragraph 0022).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz as applied to claim 1 above, and further as evidenced by US PG Pub No. 2004/0043053 (Yu et al. hereinafter).
In re claim 20, with reference to the Figs. Noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz discloses the claimed invention including wherein the first thermal liner and the second thermal liner are biodegradable (Tanimoto et al. can be formed by a larger percentage of Si02 Silica at column 5, lines 65-67, which is biodegradable as evidenced by Yu et al., paragraph 0013).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US PG Pub No. 2011/0131722 (Scott et al. hereinafter)
In re claim 21, with reference to the Figs. noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz disclose the claimed invention including wherein the first thermal liner and the second thermal liner are compostable (as in re claim 20 above).
Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz fail to disclose wherein at least one of the first thermal liner and the second thermal liner comprises R-4 poly-encapsulated recycled cotton.
However, Scott discloses an alternative material for a thermal insulating liner including a vinyl cover encapsulating a cotton sponge (paragraph 0038), and notes that a range of R values are foreseen as desirable and tailored to particular usage scenarios (paragraphs 0037-0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilized a known material for the thermal liners of Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz, 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. MPEP 2144.07. Please note that in the instant application, paragraph 0028, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 24 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of US Patent No. 6,763,678 (Harper hereinafter).
In re claims 24 and 25, with reference to the Figs. noted above, Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz disclose the claimed invention except a divider defining at least one vent opening, the divider being positioned in the insulated cavity and dividing the insulated cavity into an upper chamber and a lower chamber.
However, with reference to Figs. 1 and 2, Harper discloses an insulated packaging assembly (10) having an insulated cavity (24), including a divider (44) defining at least one vent opening (48), the divider being positioned in the insulated cavity and dividing the insulated cavity into an upper chamber (32) and a lower chamber (34).
PNG
media_image8.png
643
485
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
514
438
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have modified the packaging assembly of Tanimoto et al. in view of Lantz to have included a vented divider as taught by Harper for the purposes of ensuring desired separation of contents such that contents located in the lower chamber do not contaminate contents of the upper chamber (Harper, column 3, lines 5-29), naturally allowing upper contents to be kept warmer/dryer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 8-10 of the Remarks that the newly recited limitations of claims 1 and 11, particularly regarding the relative heights of the liner between the bend lines, and of the box, are not taught by the prior art of record. However, for the reasons discussed in re claim 1 above, support is not found for the liner being of a height range that includes heights taller than the box, and Applicant’s original disclosure requires the height of the liner, measured between the bend lines, which are located on the inner surface of the liner (see claim 9), to be less than that of the box as to account for the thicknesses of the first and third portions of the liner while still fitting in the height defined by the box. Therefore, the limitations being considered on the merits are rejected as in re claims 1 and 11 above.
No further arguments are presented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW T KIRSCH whose telephone number is (571)270-5723. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9a-5p EST.
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 Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
/ANDREW T KIRSCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733