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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/27/2026 has been entered.
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) 1-6, 9-11, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuguchi (JPH 082 308 37) in view of Davis (U.S. Patent No. 4,961,302).
Regarding claim 1: Mizuguchi discloses a heat seal jaw for forming a heat seal in a microwave popcorn package, comprising:
a heat seal body portion extending longitudinally between “opposing first and second ends” (Fig. 4; via upper and lower ends of body 25), the heat seal body portion defining a first side extending between the first end and the second end and defining a second side extending between the first end and the second end opposite the first side (Fig. 4; via the longitudinal first and second sides of 25); and
a seal portion extending and tapering from the heat seal body portion (Figs. 4, 8, and 9; via 96) and terminating at a bottom portion, the seal portion defining a first tapered portion on the first side (via 100) and a second tapered portion on the second side (via 99), wherein a cross-sectional width of the bottom surface of the seal portion along a horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, see for example (Figs. 4 and 6; via the bottom section of the seal body portion 96 extending along two ends)
Mizuguchi may not suggest the amended claim referring to the seal portion extending from about 15% to about 35% of a cross-sectional width of the body portion along the horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, the bottom surface of the seal portion configured to contact the package, nor each of the first tapered portion and the second tapered portion includes a taper from about 50 degrees to about 70 degrees from a horizontal extending from the first side to the second side; to keep non-seal edge portions of the heat seal jaw away from paper and adhesive of the microwave popcorn package to avoid substantial moisture flashing that could introduce bubbles or voids in the adhesive (intended use limitations of the tapered portions).
However, Davis discloses similar seal jaw with seal portion extending from about 15% to about 35% of a cross-sectional width of the body portion along the horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, the bottom surface of the seal portion configured to contact the package, and each of the first tapered portion and the second tapered portion includes a taper from about 50 degrees to about 70 degrees from a horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, see for example (Figs. 6-9; via body portions of seals 80 and/or 82 with their tip sealing surfaces 90/96, which is about 15-35 of a cross sectional width of the body portions and the shown tapered portions between the body and tip sealing surfaces includes a taper from about 50 to 70 degrees).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified Mizuguchi’s sealing jaw with a seal portion extending from about 15% to about 35% of a cross-sectional width of the body portion along the horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, the bottom surface of the seal portion configured to contact the package, and each of the first tapered portion and the second tapered portion includes a taper from about 50 degrees to about 70 degrees from a horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, as suggested by Davis, in order to improve the seals and sealing techniques for forming seals through the liquid contents of a pouch or blanket being formed (column 2, lines 29-45).
Regarding claim 2: Mizuguchi discloses that the first tapered portion transitions from the taper to a second taper (Figs. 8-9; via 100 transitions toward 99).
Regarding claim 3: Mizuguchi discloses that the second taper is from about 40 degrees to about 50 degrees from the horizontal (Figs. 8-9; via taper 99 appears to be about 40-50 degrees from the horizontal).
Regarding claim 4: Mizuguchi discloses that the second tapered portion transitions from the first taper to a third taper (Figs. 8-9; via 99 transitions toward 100 to third taper region 97a).
Regarding claim 5: Mizuguchi discloses the third taper is from about 40 degrees to about 50 degrees from the horizontal (Figs. 4, 8-9; via 97a “about” 40-50 degrees from the horizontal).
Regarding claim 6: Mizuguchi discloses that wherein the seal portion defines a third tapered portion on the first side longitudinally displaced from the first tapered portion, and wherein the third tapered portion transitions from a fourth taper of about 50 degrees to about 70 degrees to a fifth taper of about 5 degrees to about 35 degrees, see for example (Figs. 4 & 6-8; via all shown different tapers surfaces of 97a; seems to be “about” 50-70 degrees transition from the third to fourth taper and “about” 5-35 degrees from third to fifth taper ), see annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image1.png
147
303
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
140
261
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9: Mizuguchi discloses a cross-sectional width of the seal portion is from about 0.30in to about 0.45in. (it appears that the width of the seal portion 96/97 “about” 0.30 to 0.45).
Regarding claim 10: Mizuguchi discloses that the seal portion defines a longitudinal end taper at one or both of the first end and the second end (via longitudinal end portions of taper 99/100).
Regarding claim 11: Mizuguchi discloses that the longitudinal end taper is from about 5 degrees to about 40 degrees from a horizontal extending from the first end to the second end, see for example (Figs. 8-9; via longitudinal end portions of taper 99/100 appear to be “about” 5-40 degrees from a horizontal extending from the first to the second ends of body 46).
Regarding claim 21: Mizuguchi may not suggest the amended claim referring to the seal portion extending from about 15% to about 35% of a cross-sectional width of the body portion along the horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, the bottom surface of the seal portion configured to contact the package, each of the first tapered portion and the second tapered portion includes a taper from about 50 degrees to about 70 degrees from a horizontal extending from the first side to the second side; nor the seal portion defines a longitudinal end taper at one or both of the first end and the second end from about 5 to 40 degrees from the horizontal extending from the first end to the second end, “to keep non-seal edge portions of the heat seal jaw away from paper and adhesive of the microwave popcorn package to avoid substantial moisture flashing that could introduce bubbles or voids in the adhesive”, (intended use limitations of the seal and/or tapered portions).
However, Davis discloses similar seal jaw with seal portion extending from about 15% to about 35% of a cross-sectional width of the body portion along the horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, the bottom surface of the seal portion configured to contact the package, each of the first tapered portion and the second tapered portion includes a taper from about 50 degrees to about 70 degrees from a horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, see for example (Figs. 6-9; via body portions of seals 80 and/or 82 with their tip sealing surfaces 90/96, which is about 15-35 of a cross sectional width of the body portions and the shown tapered portions between the body and tip sealing surfaces includes a taper from about 50 to 70 degrees), and the seal portion defines a longitudinal end taper at one or both of the first end and the second end from about 5 to 40 degrees from the horizontal extending from the first end to the second end, see for example (Figs. 6-9; via body portions of seals 80 and/or 82 with their longitudinal end taper at one or both ends 90/96 are from about 5-40 degrees).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified Mizuguchi’s sealing jaw with a seal portion extending from about 15% to about 35% of a cross-sectional width of the body portion along the horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, the bottom surface of the seal portion configured to contact the package, each of the first tapered portion and the second tapered portion includes a taper from about 50 degrees to about 70 degrees from a horizontal extending from the first side to the second side, and the seal portion defines a longitudinal end taper at one or both of the first end and the second end from about 5 to 40 degrees from the horizontal extending from the first end to the second end, as suggested by Davis, in order to improve the seals and sealing techniques for forming seals through the liquid contents of a pouch or blanket being formed (column 2, lines 29-45).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 9-11, and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely sole on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
As set forth above the Office believes that the argued upon matter of having a sealing jaw with body portion and seal portion being tapered in certain range to have a sealing surface horizontally extending with certain angles as supported and shown by the filed drawings of the application (Figs. 7A-7B), are very old and know in the package sealing arts. The Office was able to find many old references showing similar sealing bars been used, see cited references in the attached PTO-892.
In respect to any specific ranges, that would be only a matter of design choice to be made by those killed in the art and/or discovering an optimum or workable ranges to come up with any specific ranges, which only involves routine skill in the art. Noting, the claimed invention is referring to a broad range values using broad term “about”.
Further, the claims continue to point out to different intended uses of the sealing jaw and/or sealing portion, which not given much patentable weight. It is noted that as long as the applied art of Mizuguchi ‘837 and/or Davis ‘302 show sealing jaws with the claimed structures, what it is used for (cutting, sealing, and/or others) or how it is been used are nothing more than a n intended use. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMEH TAWFIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4470. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Shelle Self can be reached on 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.
/SAMEH TAWFIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights