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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/30/2026 has been entered.
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 3, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sexton (US 7,451,909) in view of David (US 2021/0061519).
Regarding claim 3, Sexton discloses a paper sack (20) comprising: a first open end (end of sleeve 14; Fig. 3); and a closed second end (closed end of 12) opposite the first open end, the first open end and the second closed end being spaced apart from each other by a length of the paper sack (Fig. 3), wherein the paper sack is configured such that the second closed end is moveable away from the first open end to increase the paper sack to a second length (Figs. 3-4), further comprises two layers (12, 14) arranged such that two layers are slidable inside one another, wherein the first open end is formed by a first layer of the two layers and the second closed end is formed by a second layer of the two or more layers, wherein the two or more layers are not connected to each other and thus do not form connected paper layers. See Figs. 1-4. Sexton discloses using paper, but does not necessarily disclose two paper layers.
David, which is drawn to a sack, discloses using paper layers. See [0041]. Thus, it 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 to use the common material of paper, as disclosed by David, for the layers of Sexton in order to have a flexible and affordable device. Moreover, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use paper layers in order to flexible/affordable device, 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. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 8, as modified above, Sexton discloses a first end of the each of the two paper layers facing the first open end of the paper sack, and are capable of being at different distances from the first open end of the paper sack. See Figs. 3-4.
Regarding claim 9, as modified above, Sexton discloses the two paper layers arranged such that one of the two paper layers is further inside the paper sack than a second of the two paper layers, and wherein a first end of the one of the two paper layers can be relatively further away from the first open end of the paper sack than a first end of the second of the two paper layers. See Figs. 3-4.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/30/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEREK J BATTISTI whose telephone number is (571)270-5709. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm M-F.
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.
/DEREK J BATTISTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
