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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 01/07/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goodrich (US 2021/0031996) in view of Alam et al (US Patent 6,146,484).
Regarding claim 1, Goodrich discloses a method for making an isothermal wrapping comprising:
placing a first paper layer on a work surface (expanded slit paper sheet 102),
overlapping at least partially a second isothermal paper layer on said first paper layer, said second layer having a plurality of incisions (expanded slit paper sheet 203),
applying to said second layer a first and a second traction force acting in opposite verses of the same direction so as to widen said plurality of incisions in order to obtain a honeycomb shape (see paragraphs [0125] and [0130]),
preparing a third paper layer (embossed paper 101),
at least partly overlapping said third paper layer on said second layer (see Fig. 8A).
Goodrich discloses adhesively bonding the layers together with adhesive strip 502 (see paragraph [0204]). However, Goodrich does not disclose heat-sealing the first, second and third layers together forming said wrapping in the manner claimed by the applicant. Regarding this difference, the applicant is directed to the reference of Alam.
Alam discloses a method for making sheets of honeycomb materials. As shown in Fig. 1, sheet materials 10 and 12 are formed into desired shapes. Adhesive deposits 17 and 19 are applied to the sheets and the sheets are bonded. Alam discloses that the adhesive deposits 17 and 19 may comprise of a heat curable resin composite material or room temperature curable adhesive. If heat is required, heated tacking rollers 20 and 22 are provided. See col. 2, lines 39-43 and col. 3, lines 4-9.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to employ and heat-activated adhesive to heat-seal the materials, as taught by Alam, in the method of Goodrich since Alam discloses heat-sealing and room-temperature sealing are functionally, equivalent, alternate expedients in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Goodrich discloses adhesively bonding the layers together with adhesive strip 502 (see paragraph [0204]).
Regarding claim 3, it is the examiner’s position that the glue inherently passes through the empty portions of said second layer for gluing on the third layer as claimed by the applicant.
Regarding claims 4-5 and 8-9, it is the examiner’s position that folding and edge-sealing are well known and conventional in the art and it would have been obvious to apply the adhesive in the manner claimed in order to produce articles with desired physical shape and configuration.
Regarding claim 6, it is the examiner’s position that allowing a heat-activated adhesive to cool is an inherent step in a manufacturing process.
Regarding claim 7, employing a heat-sealing step carried out at a temperature between 150-250°C would be obvious based on the physical properties of the adhesive being employed. For example, polyurethane has a melting point between 100-210°C and polyamide has a melting point of 190-350°C.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES D SELLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1237. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30-5.
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, Phillip Tucker can be reached at 571-272-1095. 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.
JAMES D. SELLS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1745
/JAMES D SELLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745