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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 2, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 26, “between the first fold and the second fold” should be --between the second fold and the third fold--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 15-20 and 22 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.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the gusset being having two or fewer fold lines spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance when the bottom plane of the bag is orthogonal to the first and second sheets of flexible material” in lines 45-47. As can be seen in figure 8, there is support for two fold lines spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance. There is no support, however, for “fewer”. Accordingly, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement.
Claims 16-20 and 22 are further rejected as being dependent on claim 15.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 15-20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the gusset being having two or fewer fold lines spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance when the bottom plane of the bag is orthogonal to the first and second sheets of flexible material” in lines 45-47. Claims 16 and 17 further define specific distances of the second, third and fourth folds.
However, the structure intended by “the gusset having…fewer fold lines spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance” is not clear and is not further supported or clarified by the specification. Additionally, fewer than two fold lines (i.e., one or zero) in general cannot meet “spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance”.
Further, the claim defines the gusset as having a first fold and first fold line, a second fold and second fold line, a third fold and third fold line, and a fourth fold and fourth fold line, each of which have defined distances from the bottom plane of the bag that are not equal, as recited in claims 15, 16 and 17. It is therefore not clear how the gusset can have two fold lines spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance.
For the purpose of examination, the gusset will be considered as depicted in figure 8, such that the gusset has an additional fold line and such that the gusset has two fold lines spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance.
Claims 18-20 and 22 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, claim 15 above.
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 15, 17 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolic (US 4,768,818 A) in view of Surplus (US 5,704,670 A), Boyd (US 5,265,961 A) and Dell et al. (US 8,448,262 B2, hereinafter Dell).
Regarding claims 15 and 17, Kolic teaches an evertable bag for containing one or more items, the bag comprising:
a first sheet (11) of flexible material having an exterior surface and an interior surface (Fig. 2);
a second sheet (14) of flexible material having an exterior surface and an interior surface (Fig. 2), the interior surfaces of the first and second sheets being generally opposed to each other in an interior of the bag and the exterior surfaces of the first and second sheets facing away from the interior of the bag (Fig. 2), the bag having a volume sized and shaped for receiving an adult human hand therein (Fig. 3), the first and second sheets having a top and a bottom;
a closure member (23) mounted on the exterior surface of the first sheet or the second sheet;
a gusset (12, 13) operatively connecting the first and second sheets to each other thereby closing a bottom of the bag (Fig. 2), a bottom plane of the bag extending between the bottom of the first sheet of flexible material and the bottom of the second sheet of flexible material, the gusset comprising a first fold (17), the first fold being disposed between the first and second sheets and including a first fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a first distance, the gusset forming a first volume (P2) between the first fold and the interior surface of the first sheet (Fig. 2) and a second volume (P3) between the first fold and the interior of the second sheet (Fig. 2), the first volume being sized and shaped to receive one of fingers of the adult human hand and a thumb of the adult human hand (Fig. 3), and the second volume being sized and shaped to receive the other of the fingers and the thumb of the human hand (Fig. 3) for grasping the one or more items to be stored in the bag such that an exterior surface of the gusset engages the one or more items (Fig. 4);
the first fold line extending parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material, the first fold line being free of intersection with the bottom of the bag, the first fold including a first section extending from the bottom plane of the bag to the first fold line (Fig. 2);
the bag being evertable by pulling a grasped one or more items upward through an open top of the bag (Fig. 4) whereby the positions of the interior and exterior surfaces of the first and second sheets are exchanged to define an everted bag (Fig. 5), the one or more items are located within the everted bag (Fig. 5) and the closure member is positioned on an interior of the everted bag for closing the everted bag (Fig. 6) (column 1 line 51-column 3 line 15, column 4 lines 14-34 and Fig. 1-6).
Kolic fails to teach the closure member being a first closure member mounted on the exterior surface of the first sheet and a second closure member mounted on the exterior surface of the second sheet, wherein the second closure member is configured for mating engagement with the first closure member. Surplus teaches an analogous evertable bag comprising first and second sheets having an exterior surface and an interior surface and a closure member (15 or 18) mounted on the exterior surface of the first sheet and/or the second sheet (Fig. 2-4), wherein the bag is evertable by pulling a grasped one or more items upward through an open top of the bag whereby the positions of the interior and exterior surface of the first and second sheets are exchanged to define an everted bag (Fig. 5, 6), the one or more items are located within the everted bag (Fig. 7), and the closure member is positioned on an interior of the everted bag for closing the everted bag (Fig. 6, 7) (column 2 line 15-column 3 line 2 and Fig. 1-7). Surplus further teaches that the closure member can be an adhesive (18) on a foldable flap (17) (Fig. 3) or alternatively can be first and second closure members (15) mounted on exterior surfaces of the first and second sheets and configured for mating engagement with each other when the bag is everted (column 2 lines 15-33 and Fig. 2-7).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to replace the adhesive closure member of Kolic with first and second closure members mounted on respective exterior surfaces of the first and second sheets and configured for mating engagement when the bag is everted, as taught by Surplus, as the substitution of one known closure means for an alternative known closure means to achieve the equivalent result of providing a closure for the everted bag would have been obvious and would have yielded predictable results to one skilled in the art.
Kolic also fails to teach a second fold, a third fold and a fourth fold, wherein the second fold is disposed between the first and second sheets and includes a second fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a second distance, wherein the third fold is disposed between the first and second sheets and includes a third fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a third distance, wherein the fourth fold is disposed between the first and second sheets and includes a fourth fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a fourth distance, wherein the second fold is located proximate the first sheet, the third fold is located proximate the second sheet and the first fold is located between the second fold and the third fold, wherein the first distance of the first fold is greater than the second distance of the second fold and the third distance of the third fold in a folded, flattened condition of the gusset, wherein the second fold line extends parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material, is free of intersection with the bottom plane of the bag and includes a first section extending from the bottom of the first sheet of flexible material to the second fold line, wherein the third fold line extends parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material and is free of intersection with the bottom plane of the bag and extends, wherein the fourth fold line extends parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material and is free of intersection with the bottom plane of the bag, wherein the gusset includes an additional fold and fold line such that the gusset has two fold lines spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance when the bottom plane of the bag is orthogonal to the first and second sheets of material, and wherein the second distance of the second fold, plus the fourth distance of the fourth fold is less than the first distance of the first fold, or the third distance of the third fold plus the fourth distance of the fourth fold is less than the first distance of the first fold.
Boyd teaches an analogous bag comprising a first sheet (11), a second sheet (12), a gusset operatively connecting the first and second sheets to each other thereby closing a bottom of the bag (FIG. 4-6), and a bottom plane of the bag extending between a bottom of the first sheet and the bottom of the second sheet, the gusset comprising a first fold (42), the first fold being disposed between the first and second sheets and including a first fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward a top of the first and second sheets by a first distance, the gusset forming a first volume between the first fold and an interior surface of the first sheet (FIG. 5A) and a second volume between the first fold and the interior of the second sheet (FIG. 5A). Boyd further teaches that it is known and desirable to additionally provide the gusset with a second fold (49) and a third fold (50), wherein the second fold is disposed between the first and second sheets and includes a second fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a second distance (FIG. 5A), wherein the third fold is disposed between the first and second sheets and includes a third fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a third distance (FIG. 5A), such that the first distance of the first fold is greater than the second distance of the second fold and the third distance of the third fold in a folded, flattened condition of the gusset (FIG. 5A), wherein the second fold is located proximate the first sheet (FIG. 5A), wherein the third fold is located proximate the second sheet (FIG. 5A), and wherein the first fold is located between the second fold and the third fold (FIG. 5A), so that each of the first volume and the second volume can be individually expanded as desired and/or as necessary (column 2 lines 57-65 and FIG. 4-6). Boyd also teaches the second fold line extending parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material, being free of intersection with the bottom plane of the bag and including a first section extending from the bottom of the first sheet of flexible material to the second fold line, and the third fold line extending parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material and being free of intersection with the bottom plane of the bag and extends (FIG. 5A).
Further, Dell teaches a hand receiving device configured to isolate a user’s hand from an object to be contacted by the user, where the hand receiving device comprises a plurality of folds that define a gusset having first and second pockets (54, 58) for separately receiving the thumb of the user’s hand and the other fingers of the user’s hand (FIG. 2, 15). Dell further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide additional folds (62-meets first fold, fourth fold and additional fold) between the first and second pockets in order to desirably adjust the spacing between the first pocket and the second pocket as needed to accommodate different hand sizes (column 4 line 53-column 5 line 13 and FIG. 2).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Kolic by additionally providing the gusset with a second fold, a third fold and a fourth fold, wherein the second fold is disposed between the first and second sheets and includes a second fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a second distance, wherein the third fold is disposed between the first and second sheets and includes a third fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a third distance, wherein the fourth fold is disposed between the first and second sheets and includes a fourth fold line spaced away from the bottom plane of the bag toward the top of the first and second sheets by a fourth distance, wherein the second fold is located proximate the first sheet, the third fold is located proximate the second sheet and the first fold is located between the second fold and the third fold, wherein the first distance of the first fold is greater than the second distance of the second fold and the third distance of the third fold in a folded, flattened condition of the gusset, wherein the second fold line extends parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material, is free of intersection with the bottom plane of the bag and includes a first section extending from the bottom of the first sheet of flexible material to the second fold line, wherein the third fold line extends parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material and is free of intersection with the bottom plane of the bag and extends, wherein the fourth fold line extends parallel to the first and second sheets of flexible material and is free of intersection with the bottom plane of the bag, and wherein the gusset includes an additional fold and fold line such that the gusset has two fold lines spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance when the bottom plane of the bag is orthogonal to the first and second sheets of material, as taught by Boyd and Dell, resulting in the second distance of the second fold plus the fourth distance of the fourth fold being less than the first distance of the first fold, and the third distance of the third fold plus the fourth distance of the fourth fold being less than the first distance of the first fold, in order to configure each of the first and second volumes to be individually expandable as desired and/or as necessary and in order to provide spacing between the first volume and the second volume that can be adjusted as necessary to accommodate different hand sizes.
Regarding claim 22, Kolic as modified by Surplus, Boyd and Dell teaches the evertable bag of claim 15 above, wherein the fourth fold includes a first section of the gusset extending away from the first fold line to the fourth fold line in a direction toward the bottom of the bag and away from the top of the bag on one side of the fourth fold line, and a second section of the gusset extending from the fourth fold line away from the bottom of the bag and toward the top of the bag, the second section being located on a side of the fourth fold line opposite the first section (Dell: FIG. 2).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolic in view of Surplus, Boyd and Dell, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Dan (US 2011/0210571 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Kolic as modified by Surplus, Boyd and Dell teaches the evertable bag of claim 15 above, but fails to teach the third distance of the third fold being greater than the second distance of the second fold.
Dan teaches an evertable bag comprising a first sheet, a second sheet and a gusset operatively connecting the first sheet and the second sheet, wherein the gusset comprises a first fold (54) and forms a first volume (22) defining a first pocket between a first surface of the gusset and the first sheet and a second volume (24) defining a second pocket between a second surface of the gusset and the second sheet. Dan further teaches that it is known in the prior art to configure the first pocket to be a shorter pocket having a smaller volume than the second pocket which is longer and has a larger volume (FIG. 16, 17), such that the first pocket is configured and sized to appropriately receive a thumb of an adult human hand and such that the second pocket is configured and sized to appropriately receive fingers of the adult human hand (paragraphs 54, 55, 57-90 and FIG. 3-17).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Kolic, as modified by Boyd and Dell, by configuring the third distance of the third fold to be greater than the second distance of the second fold (such that the first volume when expanded is less than the second volume when expanded), as suggested by Dan, so that the first pocket is configured and adjustably sized to appropriately receive a thumb of an adult human hand and such that the second pocket is configured and adjustably sized to appropriately receive fingers of the adult human hand.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolic in view of Surplus, Boyd and Dell, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Schrodl (US 7,761,931 B2).
Regarding claim 18, Kolic as modified by Surplus, Boyd and Dell teaches the evertable bag of claim 15 above, but fails to teach the first and second sheets having regions formed differently from other regions of the bag to facilitate eversion of the bag, wherein the regions are formed by making impression in the material of the first sheet and in the material of the second sheet. Schrodl teaches a removable and evertable glove and further teach that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide a region (3, 5) near an opening of the glove formed differently from other regions of the glove to facilitate removal and eversion of the glove, wherein the regions are formed by making impressions in the material of the glove (column 1 line 61-column 2 line 40, column 6 line 39-column 8 line 6, column 8 line 29-column 9 line 3, column 9 line 58-column 10 line 5, column 11 lines 21-42, Fig. 1-10, 17-22, 33-36, 48, 49).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Kolic by providing the first and second sheets with regions formed differently from other regions of the bag, wherein the regions are formed by making impressions in the material of the first and second sheets, as taught by Schrodl, in order to facilitate removal and eversion of the bag.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolic in view of Surplus, Boyd and Dell, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Gaffney (US 3,924,802 A).
Regarding claim 19, Kolic as modified by Surplus, Boyd and Dell teaches the evertable bag of claim 15 above, but fails to teach a strip of material operatively connected to the first and second sheets and disposed in the interior of the bag, wherein the strip is arranged to be located on the exterior of the everted bag.
Gaffney teaches an analogous gusseted bag and further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide the bag with a strip of material (23a, 23b) operatively connected to the first and second sheet and disposed in the interior of the bag in order to provide the bag with a means for carrying the bag (column 1 line 66-column 2 line 58 and Fig. 1-3).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Kolic by additionally providing a strip of material operatively connected to the first and second sheets and disposed in the interior of the bag, as taught by Gaffney, in order to provide the bag with a means for carrying the bag. Although Gaffney fails to teach an evertable bag, application of the strip of material taught by Gaffney to the interior of the bag of Kolic would necessarily arrange the strip of material to be located on the exterior of the everted bag.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolic in view of Surplus, Boyd and Dell, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Che (US 2007/0241123 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Kolic as modified by Surplus, Boyd and Dell teaches the evertable bag of claim 15 above, but fails to teach a roll of bags comprising a web of bags, each bag being the evertable bag of claim 15 above, wherein the web of bags comprises lines of weakness between each bag configured to permit the bags to be individually torn from the web.
Che teaches an analogous bag (100) for collecting items and further teaches that analogous bags are well known in the art to be configured on a roll for easy dispensing of the bags, wherein each of the bags is separated by a line of weakness (101) to permit easy separation from the roll (paragraph 23).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to configure the evertable bag of Kolic as a roll of evertable bags comprising a web of bags, wherein the web comprises lines of weakness in the web between each bag configured to permit the bags to be individually torn from the web, as taught by Che, in order to configure the evertable bag for easy and continuous dispensing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 10-14 allowable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with respect to claims 15-20.
Applicant’s argument regarding the gusset having two or fewer folds in the gusset that are spaced from the bottom plane of the bag by the same distance when the bottom plane of the bag is orthogonal to the first and second sheets of flexible material, is not persuasive.
See 112(a) & (b) rejections above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NINA KAY ATTEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3972. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-4PM 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 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.
/NINA K ATTEL/ Examiner, Art Unit 3734
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights