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 .
REJECTIONS WITHDRAWN
All previous rejections have been withdrawn.
REJECTIONS REPEATED
There are no rejections repeated.
NEW REJECTIONS
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by JP2016-147430 (English machine translation provided herein).
JP2016-147430 discloses a single-layer or multi-layer sealant film composed of an ethylene polymer, the sealant film comprising: on a surface layer of the sealant film, a layer composed of an ethylene polymer (A) satisfying following requirements (1) to (iii): (i) a density is in a range of more than 910 kg/m3 to less than 920 kg/m2; (ii) a melt flow rate (MFR) at 190°C and a load of 2.16 kg in accordance with JIS K7210-1 is in a range of 0.1 to 20 g/10 min; and (iii) a content of a copolymer (A2) of ethylene and an a-olefin having 4 or less carbon atoms is 0% by mass or more and 50% by mass or less, and a content of a copolymer (A1) of ethylene and an a-olefin having 5 to 10 carbon atoms is 26% by mass or more and 100% by mass or less and wherein the sealant layer is composed of two layers or three layers (paragraphs [0001-0004], [0012-0028], [0039-0041], [0047-0053], [0064]).
JP2016-147430 discloses wherein the melt flow rate (MFR) of the ethylene polymer (A) is in a range of more than 1.0 g/10 min to 3.0 g/10 min, wherein the sealant film is composed of two layers, a laminate layer and a heat sealing layer, and at least the heat sealing layer is a layer composed of the ethylene polymer (A), wherein the laminate layer is a layer composed of an ethylene polymer (C) satisfying following requirements (a) and (b): (a) a density is in a range of 900 to 940 kg/m2; and (b) a melt flow rate (MFR) measured under conditions of 190°C and a load of 2.16 kg in accordance with JIS K7210-1 is in a range of 0.01 to 20 g/10 min, wherein the sealant film is composed of three layers, a laminate layer, an intermediate layer, and a heat sealing layer, and at least the heat sealing layer is a layer composed of the ethylene polymer (A) (paragraphs [0001-0004], [0013-0028], [0039-0041], [0047-0053], [0064]).
JP2016-147430 wherein the laminate layer is a layer composed of an ethylene polymer (C) satisfying following requirements (a) and (b): (a) a density is in a range of 900 to 940 kg/m2; and (b) a melt flow rate (MFR) measured under conditions of 190°C and a load of 2.16 kg in accordance with JIS K7210-1 is in a range of 0.01 to 20 g/10 min, wherein the intermediate layer is a layer composed of an ethylene polymer (C) satisfying following requirements (a) and (b): (a) a density is in a range of 900 to 940 kg/m; and (b) a melt flow rate (MFR) measured under conditions of 190°C and a load of 2.16 kg in accordance with JIS K7210-1 is in a range of 0.01 to 20 g/10 min (paragraphs [0001-0004], [0013-0028], [0039-0041], [0047-0053], [0064]).
JP2016-147430 a laminate obtained by laminating a base material layer and the sealant film, wherein lamination of the base material layer and the sealant film is carried out by bonding them by dry lamination, a packaging bag formed from the laminate, the packaging bag having the sealant film as an inner surface, comprising a component derived from spice as a content (since food contains spices) (paragraphs [0001-0004], [0013-0028], [0039-0041], [0047-0053], [0064]).
With regard to claims 4 and 5, JP2016-147430 does not specifically disclose applicant’s recited requirement (iv) and heat of fusion ratio. However, applicant’s recited requirement (iv) and heat of fusion ratio are inherent in JP2016-147430 since JP2016-147430 discloses that same materials and structure recited by applicant in the claims (see 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.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016-147430 (English machine translation provided herein).
With regard to claims 4 and 5, JP2016-147430 does not specifically disclose applicant’s recited requirement (iv) and heat of fusion ratio. However, applicant’s recited requirement (iv) and heat of fusion ratio are necessarily present in JP2016-147430 since JP2016-147430 discloses that same materials and structure recited by applicant in the claims (see above). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have provided applicant’s recited requirement (iv) and heat of fusion ratio in order to provide improved mechanical properties and/or heat sealing properties.
ANSWERS TO APPLICANT’S ARGUMENTS
Applicant’s arguments of 8/7/26 have been carefully considered but are deemed unpersuasive.
102
Paragraph [0004] of JP’430 specifically discloses a heat sealing layer obtained from ethylene/alpha-olefin copolymers having a density from 915-938 Kg/m3 which overlaps applicant’s claimed range of 910 to 920 kg/m3. JP’430 also discloses an ethylene multilayer film comprising a substrate obtained from ethylene polymer composition (B) having a density of 895-920Kg/m3 and a surface layer obtained from an ethylene polymer (A) having a density of 910-938Kg/m3 (see paragraph [0008]) wherein the surface layer is heat sealing (see claim 8 and paragraphs [0002], [0046], [0064]). Both density ranges overlap applicant’s claimed range of 910 to 920 kg/m3.
Claim 1 recites an endpoint of 0% for the alpha-olefin having 4 or less carbon atoms so the prior art need not disclose an alpha-olefin having 4 or less carbon atoms in order to read on the claims as written. Furthermore, JP’430 discloses a mixture of an alpha-olefin having 4 or less carbon atoms and an alpha-olefin having 5 to 10 carbons (paragraph [0028]).
103, Claims 4-5
In response to applicant's argument that JP’430 does not contemplate improved oil resistance, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
Unexpected Results
Claim 1 is rejected under 102 and unexpected results are not germane to a 102 rejection. Furthermore, Examples 1-4 and 6-7 disclose specific examples of the polyethylene such as ethylene-hexene and ethylene-butene copolymers which are not specifically recited in claim 1. Therefore, the allegation of unexpected results are not commensurate in scope with claims (see MPEP 716/02(d)).
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 MICHAEL C MIGGINS whose telephone number is (571)272-1494. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 1-9 pm 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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/MICHAEL C MIGGINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782
MCM
September 7, 2026
Prosecution Insights