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 § 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) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christopherson et al. (US 2003/0165663) in view of Weiss et al. (US 2001/0023001) and Farrell et al. (US 2006/0104856).
Christopherson teaches a packaging for decontamination packaging of objects for medical, pharmaceutical or cosmetic uses [0001 and 0034] a laminate comprising two polymeric films laminated together by strips of a laminating adhesive [0032]. Both polymeric films have rows of apertures, wherein the apertures in one of the polymeric films being staggered with respect to the apertures in the other film [0033]. The two polymeric films meet the claimed first layer of film and second layer of film (applies to instant claims 1-2).
The laminate of Christopherson does not have a layer of non-woven material as
claimed, but Christopherson discloses a package consists of substantially impermeable
polymer web bonded to a permeable non-woven web is known before the invention of
Christopherson [0002].
Weiss teaches a laminate comprising a lower web, an intermediate tri-layer web and a two-layer upper web (Fig. 2 and [0050]), wherein the lower web is a non-woven material [0052] and provides effective barrier against the migration of micro-organisms [0051]. The lower web meets the claimed layer of selectively permeable non-woven material. Weiss teaches the non-woven material for the lower web can be spunbonded high density polyethylene barrier fabric such as TYVEK [0052].
Christopherson and Weiss are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor that is the packaging laminate art. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to bond the non-woven lower web of Weiss into the laminate of Christopherson, and the motivation for combining would be, as Weiss suggested, to strengthen the load-bearing property of the laminate [0053] as taught or suggested by Weiss.
Christopherson does not teach the claimed type of adhesive.
However, Farrell teaches a sterilization wrap including a sealing adhesive that can be activated upon exposure to sterilization condition (abstract, [0029] and [0030]).
Christopherson and Farrell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor that is the packaging film art. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine activatable adhesive of Farrell with the invention of
Christopherson, and the motivation would be, as Farrell suggested, to form or
strengthen bonds that keep the package in a completely closed configuration [0029].
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christopherson et al. (US 2003/0165663) in view of Weiss et al. (US 2001/0023001) and Farrell et al. (US 2006/0104856), as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Dworak (US 2011/0139650).
Modified Christopherson discloses applicant’s recited packaging (see above).
Modified Christopherson does not disclose further comprising a container sealed with a film and wherein the container is a tub or a tray.
Dworak (Figs. 1-4, [0005-0026]) discloses a container sealed with a film and wherein the container is a tub or a tray for the purpose of providing improved sterilization and/or packaging of sterilized products.
Therefore it would have been obvious to have provided a container sealed with a film and wherein the container is a tub or a tray in modified Christopherson in order to provide improved sterilization and/or packaging of sterilized products as taught or suggested by Dworak.
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christopherson et al. (US 2003/0165663) in view of Weiss et al. (US 2001/0023001), Farrell et al. (US 2006/0104856) and Dworak (US 2011/0139650), as applied to claims 3-5 above, and further in view of JP05-319459 (English machine translation provided herein).
Modified Christopherson discloses applicant’s packaging (see above).
Dworak (Figs. 1-4, [0005-0026]) discloses a bag enclosing the container, the bag also comprising the film.
Modified Christopherson does not disclose a pharmaceutical packaging in the container that is sealed with the film and further comprising a second bag enclosing the bag, the second bag also comprising the film.
JP05-319459 discloses a pharmaceutical packaging in the container that is sealed with the film and further comprising a second bag enclosing the bag, the second bag also comprising the film ([0002 -0006], [0028], [0031]) for the purpose of providing improved decontamination.
Therefore it would have been obvious to have provided a pharmaceutical packaging in the container that is sealed with the film and further comprising a second bag enclosing the bag, the second bag also comprising the film in modified Christopherson in order to provide improved decontamination as taught or suggested by JP05-319459.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christopherson et al. (US 2003/0165663) in view of Weiss et al. (US 2001/0023001) and Farrell et al. (US 2006/0104856), as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of JP05-319459 (English machine translation provided herein).
Modified Christopherson discloses applicant’s packaging (see above).
Modified Christopherson does not disclose a pharmaceutical packaging in the container that is sealed with the film and further comprising a second bag enclosing the bag, the second bag also comprising the film.
JP05-319459 discloses a pharmaceutical packaging in the container that is sealed with the film and further comprising a second bag enclosing the bag, the second bag also comprising the film ([0002 -0006], [0028], [0031]) for the purpose of providing improved decontamination.
Therefore it would have been obvious to have provided a pharmaceutical packaging in the container that is sealed with the film and further comprising a second bag enclosing the bag, the second bag also comprising the film in modified Christopherson in order to provide improved decontamination as taught or suggested by JP05-319459.
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christopherson et al. (US 2003/0165663) in view of Weiss et al. (US 2001/0023001), Farrell et al. (US 2006/0104856) and JP05-319459 (English machine translation provided herein), as applied to claims 8-9 above, and further in view of Dworak (US 2011/0139650).
Modified Christopherson discloses applicant’s recited packaging (see above).
Modified Christopherson does not disclose further comprising a container sealed with a film and wherein the container is a tub or a tray.
Dworak (Figs. 1-4, [0005-0026]) discloses a container sealed with a film and wherein the container is a tub or a tray for the purpose of providing improved sterilization and/or packaging of sterilized products.
Therefore it would have been obvious to have provided a container sealed with a film and wherein the container is a tub or a tray in modified Christopherson in order to provide improved sterilization and/or packaging of sterilized products as taught or suggested by Dworak.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-21 are allowed. The prior art does not teach or suggest applicant’s recited packaging for decontaminated packaging of objects for medical, pharmaceutical or cosmetic uses, comprising: a film having in sequence from outside to inside of the film: a first layer of film being essentially impermeable for the decontaminating gas or vapor, having a first needling, perforation and/or cut pattern; an adhesive layer which can be activated by energy transmission, covering an entire surface of the first layer; and a layer of selectively permeable non-woven material being essentially impermeable for microorganisms, wherein the adhesive layer is between the first layer and the layer of selectively permeable non-woven material.
A combination of prior arts Christopherson et al. (US 2003/0165663 A1), Weiss et al. (US 2001/0023001 A1) and Farrell et al. (US 2006/0104856 A1) teaches a laminate comprising two polymeric films laminated together by strips of a laminating adhesive, wherein both polymeric films have rows of apertures, wherein the apertures in one of the polymeric films being staggered with respect to the apertures in the other film. The two polymeric films meet the claimed first layer of film and second layer of film. The combination of the prior arts teaches the laminate is bonded to a permeable non-woven web is known before the invention of Christopherson. The combination of the prior arts teaches the adhesive can be activated upon exposure to sterilization condition, wherein the adhesive cab be an adhesive activated by UV radiation. However, Christopherson, Weiss and Farrell either singly or as a combination do not teach or suggest the adhesive is provided covering an entire surface of the polymeric film as recited in claim 12 (see NOA of 10/18/23 from parent case 16/731,615 and applicant’s arguments of 8/7/23 from parent case 16/731,615).
Conclusion
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
February 11, 2026