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 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 1-3, 5-8, and 14-18 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.
Amended claim 1 now includes limitations requiring the sealing area being associated with the first wall, however the disclosure as originally filed does not provide support for the limitation “the second wall protruding beyond the first wall…” in combination with “the sealing area being associated with the first wall” as now claimed.
Claims 2, 3, 5-8, and 14-18 are rejected for incorporating the new matter by dependency.
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 1-3, 5-8, and 14-18 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.
Regarding claim 1, the newly added claim limitation “the sealing area being associated with the first wall” renders the claim indefinite as the metes and bounds of what “associated with” means cannot be ascertained from the claim language. Further, the specification as originally filed does not shed any light onto what is meant by the claim limitation.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the cover" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the cover element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2, 3, 5-8, and 14-18 are rejected for incorporating the indefinite limitation by dependency.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the sealing area being associated with the first wall must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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, 4-6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,503,328 to Roccaforte et al. (hereafter Roccaforte).
Regarding claim 1, Roccaforte discloses a paperboard envelope (222; Fig. 7), wherein the envelope (222) is formed from a blank similar to the blank (20; depicted in Figs. 1-6), and the envelope (222) includes a main closure flap (250) at one of the short ends of the envelope (222) rather than the long end of the envelope as depicted in Figs. 1-6 (column 6, lines 56-65).
Roccaforte, as discussed above, meets the recitation “pouch-type bag, with a first wall and a second wall which comprise paper and which are joined together by side edges so as to provide a filling space, the second wall protruding beyond the first wall as viewed in the longitudinal direction of the bag”.
Roccaforte further discloses the bag (222) comprises with two ends, wherein a base is arranged at one end, which base comprises at least one envelope area (254) of the second wall, wherein the envelope area is folded over about a first crease line at least onto parts of the first wall (Fig. 7), wherein an opening is provided at the other end via which opening the filling space is accessible (open edge of the envelope; column 7, lines 2-6).
Roccaforte discloses one of the walls comprises a 262; Fig. 1) onto the outside of the other wall (20) and can be fastened there by means of an adhesive element (264) applied to the sealing area, and characterized in that
the sealing area between the second crease line (262) and the adhesive element (264) comprises a tear-off aid (tear strip 268) with which the sealing area can be at least partially severed to allow renewed access to the filling space (column 7, lines 7-18).
Regarding claim 4, the tear strip (268) in the Roccaforte bag may comprise at least one material (filaments) having a greater strength than a material from which the pouch-type bag is made (column 3, lines 32-45).
Regarding claim 5, Roccaforte discloses a second adhesive element (270) is arranged between the second crease line (62) and the tear-off aid (268) so as to be able to reattach a severed sealing area to the second wall (column 7, lines 7-18).
Regarding claim 6, Roccaforte discloses the second adhesive element (270) is covered with a removable cover element in order to be able to activate the second adhesive element only when required (column 7, lines 7-18).
Regarding claim 8. Roccaforte discloses the pouch-type bag is formed from a flat web, wherein the edges of the flat web are joined together along a bonding seam (258) extending parallel to the longitudinal direction, wherein the bonding seam is encompassed by the second wall (Fig. 7; column 6, lines 56-67 through column 7, lines 1-2).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over European Patent Application No. 3 556 679 to Leandersson et al. (hereafter Leandersson) in view of WIPO Publication WO 2016/120017 to Ilausky et al. (hereafter Ilausky).
Regarding claim 1, Leandersson discloses a pouch-type bag, said bag comprising:
a first wall (20) and a second wall (10) which include paper and which are joined together by side edges (11, 12, 21, 22) so as to provide a filling space, the second wall (10) protruding beyond the first wall (20) as viewed in a longitudinal direction of the bag (Fig. 1),
two ends, with a base being arranged at one end (13), the base including at least one envelope area (41) of the second wall (10), the envelope area (41) being folded over about a first crease line (42; Fig. 1) at least onto parts of the first wall (Fig. 2), an opening being provided at another end (24), which meets the structure implied by the functional recitation “via which opening the filling space is accessible”, one of the first wall and the second wall (10) including a sealing area (43) which can be folded over about a second crease line (44; Fig. 1) onto the outside of the other of the first wall and the second wall (20) and can be fastened there via an adhesive element (49) applied to the sealing area (paragraph [0089]),
the sealing area between the second crease line (44) and the adhesive element (49) including a tear-off aid (tear strip 47), which meets the structure implied by the functional recitation “with which the sealing area is at least partially severable to allow renewed access to the filling space” and the sealing area being associated with the first wall (when sealed, insomuch as the meaning can be ascertained); except does not expressly disclose the material strip as claimed.
However, Ilausky teaches a similar bag wherein the tear-off aid includes at least one material strip (16) having a greater strength than a material from which the bag is made (paper) as claimed.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to add the material strip taught by Ilausky to the tear-off aid taught by Leandersson, in order to assist in tearing off the removable portion as taught by Ilausky.
Insomuch as the strength of the material strip could be in question, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to use a material having a greater strength than a material of which the pouch-type bag is made for the at least one material strip in the Leandersson as modified above bag, 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.
Regarding claim 2, Leandersson as modified above discloses tear strip may for example be constituted by two parallel rows of perforations and extends parallel with the second end of the bag (paragraph [0072]), which meets the recitation “the tear-off aid includes a perforation line.”
Regarding claim 3, Leandersson as modified above discloses tear strip may for example be constituted by two parallel rows of perforations and extends parallel with the second end of the bag (paragraph [0072]), which meets the recitation “the tear-off aid includes two substantially parallel perforation lines.”
Regarding claim 5, Leandersson as modified above discloses a second adhesive element (48) arranged between the second crease line (44) and the tear-off aid (47), which meets the structure implied by the functional recitation “so as to be able to reattach a severed sealing area to the second wall.”
Regarding claim 6, Leandersson as modified above discloses the second adhesive element (48) is covered with a removable cover element in order to be able to activate the second adhesive element only when required (paragraph [0089]).
Regarding claim 7, Leandersson as modified above discloses the claimed invention, especially the peel and seal strips and the tear strip may be manufactured by providing two glue lines (e.g., of pressure sensitive glue) on the re-closable second flap, covering the glue lines with a release liner and perforating the release liner and the re-closable flap (paragraph [0073]), which meets the recitation “the tear-off aid includes the at least one material strip…, the material strip and the cover element being made of a same material.”
Regarding claim 14, Leandersson as modified above discloses the material from which the pouch-type bag is made is paper (Abstract).
Regarding claim 15, Leandersson as modified above discloses the perforation line extends parallel to the second crease line (see Figs. 1, 2, 4).
Regarding claim 16, Leandersson as modified above discloses the two substantially parallel perforation lines extend parallel to the second crease line (see Figs. 1, 2, 4).
Regarding claim 17, Leandersson as modified above discloses the material from which the pouch-type bag is made is paper (Abstract).
Regarding claim 18, Leandersson as modified above discloses the material strip and the cover element are formed integrally (It has been held that the term "integral" is sufficiently broad to embrace constructions united by such means as fastening and welding. In re Hotte, 177 USPQ 326, 328 (CCPA 1973)).
Claim(s) 1, 5, 6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,503,328 to Roccaforte et al. (hereafter Roccaforte) in view of WIPO Publication WO 2016/120017 to Ilausky et al. (hereafter Ilausky).
Regarding claim 1, Roccaforte discloses a paperboard envelope (222; Fig. 7), wherein the envelope (222) is formed from a blank similar to the blank (20; depicted in Figs. 1-6), and the envelope (222) includes a main closure flap (250) at one of the short ends of the envelope (222) rather than the long end of the envelope as depicted in Figs. 1-6 (column 6, lines 56-65).
Roccaforte, as discussed above, meets the recitation “pouch-type bag, said bag comprising: a first wall and a second wall which include paper and which are joined together by side edges so as to provide a filling space, the second wall protruding beyond the first wall as viewed in a longitudinal direction of the bag”.
Roccaforte further discloses the bag (222) comprises two ends, with a base being arranged at one end, the base including at least one envelope area (254) of the second wall, the envelope area being folded over about a first crease line at least onto parts of the first wall (Fig. 7), an opening being provided at another end via which opening the filling space is accessible (open edge of the envelope; column 7, lines 2-6).
Roccaforte discloses one of the first wall and the second wall including a sealing area (262; Fig. 1) which can be folded over about a second crease line onto the outside of the other of the first wall and the second wall (20) and can be fastened there via an adhesive element (264) applied to the sealing area,
the sealing area between the second crease line (262) and the adhesive element (264) includes a tear-off aid (tear strip 268) with which the sealing area is at least partially severable to allow renewed access to the filling space (column 7, lines 7-18); except does not expressly disclose the material strip as claimed.
However, Ilausky teaches a similar bag wherein the tear-off aid includes at least one material strip (16) having a greater strength than a material from which the bag is made (paper) as claimed.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to add the material strip taught by Ilausky to the tear-off aid taught by Roccaforte, in order to assist in tearing off the removable portion as taught by Ilausky.
Insomuch as the strength of the material strip could be in question, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to use a material having a greater strength than a material of which the pouch-type bag is made for the at least one material strip in the Roccaforte as modified above bag, 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.
Regarding claim 5, Roccaforte as modified above discloses a second adhesive element (270) is arranged between the second crease line (62) and the tear-off aid (268) so as to be able to reattach a severed sealing area to the second wall (column 7, lines 7-18).
Regarding claim 6, Roccaforte as modified above discloses the second adhesive element (270) is covered with a removable cover element in order to be able to activate the second adhesive element only when required (column 7, lines 7-18).
Regarding claim 8. Roccaforte as modified above discloses the pouch-type bag is formed from a flat web, the edges of the flat web being joined together along a bonding seam (258) extending parallel to the longitudinal direction of the bag, the bonding seam being encompassed by the second wall (Fig. 7; column 6, lines 56-67 through column 7, lines 1-2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to all claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 PETER N. HELVEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1423. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-7pm 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.
/PETER N HELVEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
May 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights