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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. EP20216431.5, filed on 12/22/2020.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 7-8, 16, and 18-19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 7 and 8 recite the limitation “the metal layer” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. For examination purposes, claims 7 and 8 will be read as “the metal layer” equating to the “metal layer” in claim 6.
Regarding claims 16 and 18-19, line 3, the phrase “signal of a frequency around 2 MHz, 6-78 MHz…”, it is unclear what is meant by the word “around” and how much of a difference is acceptable for a value to be “around” another value.
For the purposes of substantive examination, a value within the same order of magnitude as the values presented is construed as being “around”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 9, and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nilsson et al. (WO 2006065211 A1, hereinafter Nilsson).
Regarding claim 1, Nilsson discloses an induction heating sealing device for induction welding of a packaging material for producing sealed packages (Page 6, lines 9-11, “sealing jaw 14 is an inductor similar to the ones used for induction sealing (where the laminate comprises aluminum foil that generate heat).”) of pourable food products in a package producing machine (Page 1, lines 10-15, “The laminate is of the type used for manufacturing of for example liquid food packages…One of the outer layers is normally a sealable layer of a thermoplastic material which is used when sealing one laminate to another.”),
said packaging material having at least one layer of metallized film (Page 1, lines 26-27, “The magnetizable particles are dispersed in any of the layers of the packaging material laminate, preferably in one of the plastic layers.”),
the induction heating sealing device comprising an AC power source and an inductor coil connected to the AC power source (Page 6, lines 9-12, “sealing jaw 14 is an inductor similar to the ones used for induction sealing (where the laminate comprises aluminum foil that generate heat). The inductor 14 is here coupled to an alternating current supply 18.”, where an inductor is known in the prior art to be an insulated wire wound into a coil, https://en.wikipiedia.org/wiki/Inductor) and configured to induce eddy currents in the metallized film for inductive heating of the packaging material (Claim 1, “providing an alternating magnetic field to the laminates ("10, 12) in a sealing zone, thereby generating magnetic hysteresis losses in the laminate (10) comprising the magnetizable particles, which losses create heat substantially melting the sealable layer (34) in the sealing zone”, where eddy currents are induced within the laminates that have magnetizable particles through the AC inductor, Page 7, lines 37-39, “An alternating current is thereafter supplied to the conductor 24 of the sealing jaw 14. The current generates a magnetic field in the sealing zone of the laminates 10, 12.”, where the sealing jaw is an inductor),
wherein the AC power source is configured to generate a variable- current or voltage signal of a frequency higher than 1 MHz (Page 6, lines 11-15, “The inductor 14 is here coupled to an alternating current supply 18…The frequency is preferably in the MHz range, and a preferred frequency interval is 0,5-5 MHz. A most preferred interval is 1-4 MHz.”).
Regarding claim 2, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the AC power source is configured to generate a variable current or voltage signal of a frequency in the range of 1 MHz to 30 MHz (Page 6, lines 11-15, “The inductor 14 is here coupled to an alternating current supply 18…The frequency is preferably in the MHz range, and a preferred frequency interval is 0,5-5 MHz. A most preferred interval is 1-4 MHz.”).
Regarding claim 3, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the inductor coil is configured to provide a longitudinal sealing to a tube-shaped web of packaging material (Page 10, lines 5-11, “For instance, a rectangular blank or a web is to be formed into a sleeve or a tube and sealed along two longitudinal edges in an overlapping joint area 38…The areas 38 will later create an overlap which will be sealed.”).
Regarding claim 5, Nilsson discloses an induction heating sealing system (Page 6, lines 9-11, “sealing jaw 14 is an inductor similar to the ones used for induction sealing (where the laminate comprises aluminum foil that generate heat).”), comprising
a packaging material having at least one layer of metallized film (Page 1, lines 26-27, “The magnetizable particles are dispersed in any of the layers of the packaging material laminate, preferably in one of the plastic layers.”), and
an induction heating sealing device comprising an AC power source and an inductor coil connected to the AC power source (Page 6, lines 9-12, “sealing jaw 14 is an inductor similar to the ones used for induction sealing (where the laminate comprises aluminum foil that generate heat). The inductor 14 is here coupled to an alternating current supply 18.”, where an inductor is known in the prior art to be an insulated wire wound into a coil, https://en.wikipiedia.org/wiki/Inductor) and configured to induce eddy currents in the metallized film for inductive heating of the packaging material (Claim 1, “providing an alternating magnetic field to the laminates ("10, 12) in a sealing zone, thereby generating magnetic hysteresis losses in the laminate (10) comprising the magnetizable particles, which losses create heat substantially melting the sealable layer (34) in the sealing zone”, where eddy currents are induced within the laminates that have magnetizable particles through the AC inductor, Page 7, lines 37-39, “An alternating current is thereafter supplied to the conductor 24 of the sealing jaw 14. The current generates a magnetic field in the sealing zone of the laminates 10, 12.”, where the sealing jaw is an inductor),
wherein the AC power source is configured to generate a variable current or voltage signal of a frequency higher than 1 MHz (Page 6, lines 11-15, “The inductor 14 is here coupled to an alternating current supply 18…The frequency is preferably in the MHz range, and a preferred frequency interval is 0,5-5 MHz. A most preferred interval is 1-4 MHz.”).
Regarding claim 9, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above, discloses wherein the AC power source is configured to generate a variable current or voltage signal of a frequency in the range of 1 MHz to 30 MHz (Page 6, lines 11-15, “The inductor 14 is here coupled to an alternating current supply 18…The frequency is preferably in the MHz range, and a preferred frequency interval is 0,5-5 MHz. A most preferred interval is 1-4 MHz.”).
Regarding claim 11, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above, discloses wherein a package producing machine comprises at least one induction heating sealing system according to claim 5 (Page 1, lines 10-13, “The laminate is of the type used for manufacturing of for example liquid food packages, and generally comprises a layer of paper or carton, layers of plastic and barriers, such as for example oxygen barriers.”, where the induction heating sealing system is located within a packaging producing machine to create liquid food packages).
Regarding claim 12, Nilsson discloses a method for manufacturing a packaging container (Abstract, “sealing the laminates (10, 12) to each other. The invention also relates to a device for carrying out the method.”),
comprising providing a packaging material having at least one layer of metallized film (Page 1, lines 26-27, “The magnetizable particles are dispersed in any of the layers of the packaging material laminate, preferably in one of the plastic layers.”),
arranging at least two layers of the packaging material at an inductor coil of an induction heating sealing device (Page 6, lines 5-9, “A first and a second packaging material laminate 10, 12 to be sealed together in a joint by means of a sealing jaw 14 and an anvil 16. In the joint shown the two laminates are abutting each other with their inside surfaces facing each other. In this presently preferred embodiment the sealing jaw 14 is an inductor”),
supplying the inductor coil with an AC power source to generate a variable- voltage or current signal of a frequency higher than 1 MHz (Page 6, lines 11-15, “The inductor 14 is here coupled to an alternating current supply 18…The frequency is preferably in the MHz range, and a preferred frequency interval is 0,5-5 MHz. A most preferred interval is 1-4 MHz.”), and
heat sealing the at least two layers of packaging material by inducing eddy currents in the metallized film for inductive heating of the packaging material (Claim 1, “providing an alternating magnetic field to the laminates ("10, 12) in a sealing zone, thereby generating magnetic hysteresis losses in the laminate (10) comprising the magnetizable particles, which losses create heat substantially melting the sealable layer (34) in the sealing zone”, where eddy currents are induced within the laminates that have magnetizable particles through the AC inductor and where the layers 10 and 12 are sealed together, Page 7, lines 37-39, “An alternating current is thereafter supplied to the conductor 24 of the sealing jaw 14. The current generates a magnetic field in the sealing zone of the laminates 10, 12.”, where the sealing jaw is an inductor).
Regarding claim 13, Nilsson teaches the method according to claim 12, as set forth above, discloses wherein powering the inductor coil is performed by controlling the AC power source to generate a variable-voltage or current signal of a frequency in the range of 1 MHz to 30 MHz (Page 6, lines 11-15, “The inductor 14 is here coupled to an alternating current supply 18…The frequency is preferably in the MHz range, and a preferred frequency interval is 0,5-5 MHz. A most preferred interval is 1-4 MHz.”).
Regarding claim 14, Nilsson teaches the method according to claim 12, as set forth above, discloses wherein the inductor coil is longitudinally oriented in order to provide a longitudinal sealing of the packaging material (Page 10, lines 5-11, “For instance, a rectangular blank or a web is to be formed into a sleeve or a tube and sealed along two longitudinal edges in an overlapping joint area 38…The areas 38 will later create an overlap which will be sealed.”, where the sealing jaw 14 is lined with the sealing area between laminates 10 and 12, meaning that the inductor coil would also need to be longitudinally orientated in order to seal a longitudinal area of the laminates).
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.
Claims 4, 6, 8, 15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nilsson et al. (WO 2006065211 A1, hereinafter Nilsson) in view of Toft et al. (WO 2011003565 A2, hereinafter Toft).
Regarding claim 4, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the inductor coil is configured to provide a transverse sealing to a tube-shaped web of packaging material.
However, Toft discloses, in the similar field of induction heating sealing devices (Page 1, lines 6-7, “a non-foil packaging laminate for induction heat sealing into packages for liquid food or beverage.”), where inductors create seals within packaging material (Page 15, lines 17-18, “strong, durable seals, from induction heat sealing.”), where those seals can be transverse sealing to a tube shaped web of packaging material (Page 29, 6-8, “It may be of any configuration, but is preferably brick-shaped, having longitudinal and transversal seals 51 and 52, respectively”, and Page 29, lines 24-29, “a web of packaging material is formed into a tube 61 by the longitudinal edges 62, 62' of the web being united to one another in an overlap longitudinal joint 63. The tube is filled 64 with the intended liquid food product and is divided into individual packages by repeated transversal seals 65 of the tube at a pre-determined distance from one another below the level of the filled contents in the tube.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the longitudinal sealing in Nilsson to further include transversal sealing as taught by Toft.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to divide the packaging up into individual packages, where this allows for food items to have a desired geometric configuration, as stated by Toft, Page 29, lines 26-31, “The tube is filled 64 with the intended liquid food product and is divided into individual packages by repeated transversal seals 65 of the tube at a pre-determined distance from one another below the level of the filled contents in the tube. The packages 66 are separated by incisions in the transversal seals and are given the desired geometric configuration by fold formation along prepared crease lines in the material.”.
Regarding claim 6, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the metallized film comprises a metal layer having a thickness below 0.5 μm.
However, Toft discloses where the metallized film can use a metal layer that has a thickness below 0.5 μm (Page 12, lines 12-13, “An aluminium-based thin vapour deposited layer preferably has a thickness of from 5 to 100 nm, more preferably from 5-50 nm,”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified metallized particles in the layer from Nilsson to be a metal layer having the thickness values as taught by Toft.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to provide a complete barrier against water vapor from entering into inner layers of the laminate, as stated by Toft, Page 12, lines 23-26, “Generally, thin coatings of metal or a mixture of metal and metal oxide provide barrier properties against water vapour and are used also when the desired function is to prevent water vapour from migrating into and through the multilayer film or packaging laminate.”, and where the thickness can be lower than that used within a conventional aluminum foil, as stated by Toft, Page 12, lines 12-15, “An aluminium-based thin vapour deposited layer preferably has a thickness of from 5 to 100 nm, more preferably from 5-50 nm, which corresponds to less than 1 % of the aluminium metal material present in an aluminium foil of conventional thickness, i.e. 6,3 μm.”.
Regarding claim 8, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the metal layer is made of aluminum.
However, Toft discloses where the metal layer is made of aluminum (Page 12, lines 12-13, “An aluminium-based thin vapour deposited layer preferably has a thickness of from 5 to 100 nm, more preferably from 5-50 nm,”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the layer with metallized particles in Nilsson to be a layer made from aluminum as taught by Toft.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use a metal coating in order to provide a barrier for the laminate against water vapor, and where aluminum is known in the prior art as a commonly used metal for the metal coating process, as stated by Toft, Page 12, lines 23-27, “Generally, thin coatings of metal or a mixture of metal and metal oxide provide barrier properties against water vapour and are used also when the desired function is to prevent water vapour from migrating into and through the multilayer film or packaging laminate. Most commonly however, the metal in a metallisation coating is aluminium (Al).”.
Regarding claim 15, Nilsson teaches the method according to claim 12, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the inductor coil is transversally oriented in order to provide a transversal sealing of the packaging material.
However, Toft discloses, in the similar field of induction heating sealing devices (Page 1, lines 6-7, “a non-foil packaging laminate for induction heat sealing into packages for liquid food or beverage.”), where inductors create seals within packaging material (Page 15, lines 17-18, “strong, durable seals, from induction heat sealing.”), where those seals can be transverse sealing to a tube shaped web of packaging material (Page 29, 6-8, “It may be of any configuration, but is preferably brick-shaped, having longitudinal and transversal seals 51 and 52, respectively”, and Page 29, lines 24-29, “a web of packaging material is formed into a tube 61 by the longitudinal edges 62, 62' of the web being united to one another in an overlap longitudinal joint 63. The tube is filled 64 with the intended liquid food product and is divided into individual packages by repeated transversal seals 65 of the tube at a pre-determined distance from one another below the level of the filled contents in the tube.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the longitudinal sealing in Nilsson to further include transversal sealing as taught by Toft; where the sealing jaw from Nilsson is shown to be orientated along the sealing seam area, where a transverse sealing would require that the sealing jaw with the inductor also be located transversely.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to divide the packaging up into individual packages, where this allows for food items to have a desired geometric configuration, as stated by Toft, Page 29, lines 26-31, “The tube is filled 64 with the intended liquid food product and is divided into individual packages by repeated transversal seals 65 of the tube at a pre-determined distance from one another below the level of the filled contents in the tube. The packages 66 are separated by incisions in the transversal seals and are given the desired geometric configuration by fold formation along prepared crease lines in the material.”.
Regarding claim 17, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the metallized film comprises a metal layer having a thickness between 25 and 50 nm.
However, Toft discloses where the metallized film can use a metal layer that has a thickness below 0.5 μm (Page 12, lines 12-13, “An aluminium-based thin vapour deposited layer preferably has a thickness of from 5 to 100 nm, more preferably from 5-50 nm,”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified metallized particles in the layer from Nilsson to be a metal layer having the thickness values as taught by Toft.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to provide a complete barrier against water vapor from entering into inner layers of the laminate, as stated by Toft, Page 12, lines 23-26, “Generally, thin coatings of metal or a mixture of metal and metal oxide provide barrier properties against water vapour and are used also when the desired function is to prevent water vapour from migrating into and through the multilayer film or packaging laminate.”, and where the thickness can be lower than that used within a conventional aluminum foil, as stated by Toft, Page 12, lines 12-15, “An aluminium-based thin vapour deposited layer preferably has a thickness of from 5 to 100 nm, more preferably from 5-50 nm, which corresponds to less than 1 % of the aluminium metal material present in an aluminium foil of conventional thickness, i.e. 6,3 μm.”.
Claims 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nilsson et al. (WO 2006065211 A1, hereinafter Nilsson) in view of Ajiki (JP 2010225798 A).
Regarding claim 7, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the metal layer has a sheet resistance between 0.5 and 10 Ω/sq.
However, Ajiki discloses, in the similar field of metal film layers (Abstract, “transparent conductive film”), where the metal layer has a sheet resistance between 0.5 and 10 Ω/sq (Page 5, last Para., “The transparent conductive film 8 has a sheet resistance of 10 [Ω / □] or less and a thickness of 200 to 400 nm so as not to prevent light from entering.”, and where the metal film can be a layer, Page 4, Para. 5 from end, “a metal film (Au) 2 having a thickness of about 10 nm is formed on the entire surface of the substrate 1”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the metal layer in Nilsson to have a sheet resistance value as taught by Ajiki.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to keep the conductive film transparent, which can be beneficial for a user as they can see through the packaging at the food without needing to open the packaging, as stated by Ajiki, Page 5, last Para., “The transparent conductive film 8 has a sheet resistance of 10 [Ω / □] or less and a thickness of 200 to 400 nm so as not to prevent light from entering.”.
Claims 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nilsson et al. (WO 2006065211 A1, hereinafter Nilsson) in view of Toft et al. (JP 2012532043 A, hereinafter Wake).
Regarding claim 10, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the packaging material comprises an innermost heat sealable thermoplastic layer having a melting temperature lower than the melting temperature of the metallized film.
However, Wake discloses, in the similar field of induction heating sealing systems (Abstract, “induction heating fusion of the packaging laminate to the packaging container.”), where the packaging material can include an innermost heat sealable thermoplastic layer (Page 4, Para. 4 from end, “On the inside of the laminate, i.e. the side intended to face the food contents filled in a container made from the laminate, there is an innermost layer applied on the aluminum foil, this innermost inner layer being It may be composed of one or more partial layers comprising a heat-bondable adhesive polymer and / or polyolefin.”), where that thermoplastic layer has a melting temperature lower than the melting temperature of the metallized film (Polyolefin includes polyethylene which has a melting temperature of 115–135 °C, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyethylene; aluminum has a melting temperature of 660.32 °C, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminum; where the inner layer has a melting temperature lower than that of the outer layer). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the packaging in Nilsson to include the innermost heal sealable thermoplastic layer as taught by Wake.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able use the heat sealable thermoplastic layer as an additional layer to add on thickness to the packaging if desired, which can allow a user to customize how thick they want their packaging to be, as stated by Wake, Page 9, Para. 2 from end, “In some specific cases where a relatively thick heat-fusible layer is required, although not preferred from a cost standpoint, it is possible to apply an additional heat-fusible polyethylene layer inside the innermost layer 14. Of course, it is possible.”.
Claims 16 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nilsson et al. (WO 2006065211 A1, hereinafter Nilsson) in view of Andersson (EP 0796718 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the AC power source is configured to generate a variable current or voltage signal of a frequency around 2 MHz, 6.78 MHz, 13.56 MHz, or 27.12 MHz.
However, Andersson discloses, in the similar field of induction heating sealing devices (Abstract, “induction sealing of a packaging material (2) which includes a layer of aluminium foil.”), where the inductor has an AC power source that operates at around 2 MHz (Section 1, lines 57-end and Section 2, lines 1-5, “electric currents with the aid of a so-called inductor or coil which basically consists of an electric conductor formed into the desired configuration and forming one or more coil turns which are connected to a current source which supplies the coil with high frequency alternating current. Frequencies of 500 kHz and 1.8 MHz are generally employed.”, where 1.8 MHz is around 2MHz). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the induction heating sealing system in Nilsson to use the frequency as taught by Andersson.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use a frequency known in the prior art to be generally employed, where this frequency is known to function well with aluminum layers of packaging material, as stated by Andersson, Section 1, lines 52-end and Section 2, lines 1-5, “The sealing of the packaging material will be considerably facilitated if the packaging material includes a layer of metal foil, preferably aluminium foil…By inducing, in the aluminium layer of the packaging material, electric currents with the aid of a so-called inductor… Frequencies of 500 kHz and 1.8 MHz are generally employed.”.
Regarding claim 18, Nilsson teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein the AC power source is configured to generate a variable current or voltage signal of a frequency around 2 MHz, 6.78 MHz,13.56 MHz, or 27.12 MHz.
However, Andersson discloses, in the similar field of induction heating sealing devices (Abstract, “induction sealing of a packaging material (2) which includes a layer of aluminium foil.”), where the inductor has an AC power source that operates at around 2 MHz (Section 1, lines 57-end and Section 2, lines 1-5, “electric currents with the aid of a so-called inductor or coil which basically consists of an electric conductor formed into the desired configuration and forming one or more coil turns which are connected to a current source which supplies the coil with high frequency alternating current. Frequencies of 500 kHz and 1.8 MHz are generally employed.”, where 1.8 MHz is around 2MHz). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the induction heating sealing system in Nilsson to use the frequency as taught by Andersson.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use a frequency known in the prior art to be generally employed, where this frequency is known to function well with aluminum layers of packaging material, as stated by Andersson, Section 1, lines 52-end and Section 2, lines 1-5, “The sealing of the packaging material will be considerably facilitated if the packaging material includes a layer of metal foil, preferably aluminium foil…By inducing, in the aluminium layer of the packaging material, electric currents with the aid of a so-called inductor… Frequencies of 500 kHz and 1.8 MHz are generally employed.”.
Regarding claim 19, Nilsson teaches the method according to claim 12, as set forth above.
Nilsson does not disclose:
wherein powering the inductor coil is performed by controlling the AC power source to generate a variable-voltage or current signal of a frequency around 2 MHz, 6.78 MHz, 13.56 MHz, or 27.12 MHz.
However, Andersson discloses, in the similar field of induction heating sealing devices (Abstract, “induction sealing of a packaging material (2) which includes a layer of aluminium foil.”), where the inductor has an AC power source that operates at around 2 MHz (Section 1, lines 57-end and Section 2, lines 1-5, “electric currents with the aid of a so-called inductor or coil which basically consists of an electric conductor formed into the desired configuration and forming one or more coil turns which are connected to a current source which supplies the coil with high frequency alternating current. Frequencies of 500 kHz and 1.8 MHz are generally employed.”, where 1.8 MHz is around 2MHz). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the induction heating sealing system in Nilsson to use the frequency as taught by Andersson.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use a frequency known in the prior art to be generally employed, where this frequency is known to function well with aluminum layers of packaging material, as stated by Andersson, Section 1, lines 52-end and Section 2, lines 1-5, “The sealing of the packaging material will be considerably facilitated if the packaging material includes a layer of metal foil, preferably aluminium foil…By inducing, in the aluminium layer of the packaging material, electric currents with the aid of a so-called inductor… Frequencies of 500 kHz and 1.8 MHz are generally employed.”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN GUANHUA WEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9940 and whose email is kevin.wen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on 571-270-5569. 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.
/KEVIN GUANHUA WEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
01/30/2026
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761