Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/209,059

Multilayered Container And Method For Producing Same

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 13, 2023
Examiner
WITTENSCHLAEGER, THOMAS M
Art Unit
3731
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mitsubishi Gas Chemical Company Inc.
OA Round
3 (Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
384 granted / 542 resolved
+0.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
585
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.7%
+2.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.2%
-16.8% vs TC avg
§112
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 542 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 . Claim Status This Office action is in response to the filing of 2/10/2026. Claims 1, 4, 7-16, and 18-24 are currently pending. 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. Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitadera (US 2010/0233401 A1) in view of Kikuchi (US 2002/0146527 A1). Regarding claim 10, Mitadera discloses a multilayer container (the multilayer bottle, para. 0009) comprising a polyester layer (the innermost or outermost layer, para. 0011) comprising a thermoplastic resin (para. 0011) and a polyamide layer (the barrier layer, para. 0011) comprising a polyamide resin (para. 0011), wherein the polyester layer in an innermost layer and the polyamide layer is an interlayer (the barrier layer is between the outermost and innermost layers, para. 0011), and the polyamide resin comprises a polyamide resin comprising a structural unit derived from a diamine (para. 0011) and a structural unit derived from a dicarboxylic acid (para. 0011), 70 mol% or more of the structural unit derived from diamine being a structural unit derived from xylylenediamine (para. 0011); and 70 mol% or more of the structural unit derived from a dicarboxylic acid being a structural unit derived from an α,ω-linear aliphatic dicarboxylic acid having 4 to 20 carbon atoms (para. 0011). Mitadera further teaches that the container is stretched in a transverse direction and a machine direction (para. 0065), wherein the multilayer container has a three-layer structure of a polyester layer as an innermost layer and an outermost layer and a polyamide layer as an interlayer (para. 0011, Mitadera). However, Mitadera does not disclose the stretching ratio of either direction. Kikuchi teaches a similar container, wherein a stretching in a transverse direction (TD) is 2.2 times or more (2.9 times, para. 0236), and a stretching ratio in a machine direction (2.4 times, para. 0236) to the stretching ratio in the transverse direction (TD)(MD/TD) is 0.6 or more and less than 1.0 (2.4/2.9 = .828). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have stretched the container of Mitadera in a transverse direction and in the machine direction as taught by Kikuchi since Mitadera is silent with respect to the stretching ratio and Kikuchi provides a known solution. Mitadera, as modified by Kikuchi, further teaches that the bottle may have a capacity of 500 ml (para. 0080, Mitadera). However, Mitadera, as modified by Kikuchi, does not teach that the bottle has a capacity of 200 to 350 ml. Kikuchi further teaches that a multilayer container may have a capacity of 500 ml (para. 0024) or a capacity of 200 to 350 ml (300 ml, para. 0232). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the container of Mitadera such that it had a capacity of 200 to 350 ml as taught by Kikuchi since a capacity of 200 to 350 ml is a known alternative to a container having a capacity of 500 ml. The combination of Mitadera and Kikuchi further teaches a method for producing a multilayer container, comprising the following Steps 1 and 2: Step 1: a step for injection molding a multilayer preform comprising a polyester layer comprising a thermoplastic polyester resin and a polyamide layer comprising a polyamide resin (para. 0011, 0064, Mitadera), wherein the polyester layer is an innermost layer and the polyamide is an interlayer (para. 0011, Mitadera), and the polyamide resin comprises a polyamide resin comprising a structural unit derived from a diamine and a structural unit derived from a dicarboxylic acid, 70 mol% or more of the structural unit derived from a diamine being a structural unit derived from xylylenediamine; and 70 mol% or more of the structural unit derived from a dicarboxylic acid being a structural unit derived from an α,ω-linear aliphatic dicarboxylic acid having 4 to 20 carbon atoms (para. 0011, Mitadera); Step 2: a step for biaxially stretch blow molding the multilayer preform obtained in the Step 1 by a process satisfying the following conditions (1) to (5): (1) heating the surface of the multilayer preform at 80 to 120°C (para. 0098, Mitadera); (2) blowing high pressure air while changing the pressure in multiple stages with stretching the multilayer preform in a mold in a machine direction using a rod (para. 0099-0104, Mitadera); (3) a pressure in a first stage at the time of blowing high pressure air in multiple stages (primary blow pressure) of 0.3 to 2.0 Mpa (para. 0100, Mitadera); (4) a delay time in primary blow of 0.1 to 0.5 seconds (para. 0102, Mitadera); (5) a stretching ratio in a transverse direction (TD) of 2.2 times or more (2.9 times, para. 0236, Kikuchi), and a stretching ratio in a machine direction (MD) (2.4 times, para. 0236, Kikuchi) to the stretching ratio in the transverse direction (TD)(MD/TD) of 0.6 or more and less than 1.0 (2.4/2.9 = .828, Kikuchi). Regarding claim 11, Mitadera, as modified by Kikuchi, further teaches the polyamide layer of the multilayer preform has a moisture content of 0.005 to 1% by mass (although not expressly disclosed by Mitadera, since the structure is the same as what is claimed, the preform necessarily has then same moisture content as claimed). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 4, 7-9, 12-16, and 18-24 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the claims are indicated allowable based on the information set forth in the affidavit filed 2/10/2026. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim 1 have been considered and in light of the affidavit filed 2/10/2026, are persuasive. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 and its dependent claims has been withdrawn. Applicant has made no arguments with regard to claims 10 and 11. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 THOMAS M WITTENSCHLAEGER whose telephone number is (571)272-7012. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI: 9:00-5:00. 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. /THOMAS M WITTENSCHLAEGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731 3/19/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 13, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 16, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594088
UNCLAMPED FIRING LOCKOUT FOR LINEAR SURGICAL STAPLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595088
Cotton Module Unwrapping Systems, Methods, and Apparatuses
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576502
POWER TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577003
CLOSING DEVICE AND METHOD FOR CLOSING FOLDABLE PACKAGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577009
CARTONING MACHINE FOR MULTIPLE, DIFFERENT CARTON CONFIGURATIONS AND METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+11.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 542 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