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 § 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) 1-7 and 9-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Bemiss (U.S. Patent 3,917,155). Regarding Claims 1 and 12, Bemiss shows that it is known to have a method and apparatus for producing a cardboard-plastic composite shell (Abstract) comprising providing a plastic foil and preforming the plastic foil to form a shell shape (Column 6, lines 9-10), providing a cardboard blank and connecting the cardboard blank to the already preformed plastic foil (Column 6, lines 12-15), wherein the cardboard blank provided is not folded/incompletely folded directly before the connection to the preformed plastic coil and wherein when the cardboard blank is connected to the preformed plastic foil, the cardboard blank is folded onto the plastic foil by a stamp mechanism (Column 5, lines 42-67; Column 6, lines 1-5).
Regarding Claim 2, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the cardboard blank is connected to the plastic foil in such a way that the plastic foil and the cardboard blank are separable manually (Column 1, lines 51-60).
Regarding Claims 3-4, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the plastic foil is connected to the cardboard blank by lamination (Abstract: “a dimensional stability” is held to be inherent).
Regarding Claim 5, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein in the preforming the plastic foil is brought into a shape that at least substantially corresponds to an inner shape of the cardboard plastic shell composite (Figure 13).
Regarding Claim 6, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the plastic foil is heated during the preforming or directly before the preforming (Column 5, lines 54-65).
Regarding Claim 7, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein when the cardboard blank (16) is connected to the pre-formed plastic foil (12), a subregion (50) of the cardboard blank (16), which is configured to form a bottom (18) of the cardboard-plastic composite shell (10), is connected to the plastic foil (12) before a further subregion (52) of the cardboard blank (16) which is configured to form a sidewall (20) of the cardboard-plastic composite shell (10) (Figure 13).
Regarding Claim 9, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the cardboard blank is folded in such a way that the folded cardboard blank overlaps with itself (Figure 12).
Regarding Claim 10, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein when the cardboard blank is folded, a sealing edge is created which is planar and which runs around a shell opening (Figures 12-13).
Regarding Claim 11, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein at least the connection of the cardboard blank to the plastic foil is completely free of an application of additional gluing materials (Column 6, lines 6-27).
Regarding Claim 13, Bemiss shows the apparatus of claim 12 above, including one wherein the foil preforming unit comprises at least one heating device (Column 5, lines 54-65).
Regarding Claim 14, Bemiss shows the apparatus of claim 13 above, including one wherein the heating device is realized at least partially integrally with the stamping tool (Column 5, lines 54-67: both are part of the same machine).
Regarding Claim 15, Bemiss shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein in the preforming the plastic foil is drawn into a shape which at least substantially corresponds to an inner shape of the cardboard plastic composite shell (Figure 13).
Regarding Claim 16, Bemiss shows the method of claim 10 above, including one wherein the sealing edge runs around a shell opening (Column 6, lines 6-11).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 26 September 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Claim 1, applicant contends that Bemiss does not show a blank being folded onto the plastic foil by a stamp mechanism. This is not persuasive because this is not commensurate in scope with the claim. The claim currently requires “when the cardboard blank is connected to the pre-formed plastic foil, the cardboard blank is folded onto the plastic foil”. The examiner interprets that this reasonably includes a method wherein the blank and foil are connected, and the blank is folded towards/onto the plastic foil. It is maintained that Bemiss shows the claimed invention as noted above.
Regarding Claim 12, applicant contends Bemiss does not show complementary stamping tools. This is not persuasive because Bemiss describes elements 82 and 83 which are complimentary forming/stamping tools.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MONICA HUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
MONICA ANNE HUSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/MONICA A HUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742