Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/578,047

PACKAGE FOR HOLDING A FOOD PRODUCT AND MOULD FOR A PACKAGING MACHINE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 10, 2024
Examiner
THOMAS, KAREEN KAY
Art Unit
3736
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Tetra Laval Holdings & Finance S A
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
1015 granted / 1323 resolved
+6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
1353
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§102
37.4%
-2.6% vs TC avg
§112
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1323 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of group I (claims 1-12) in the reply filed on 8/4/2025 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) 1-8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Selz (US1,100,448), in view of Middleton (US2004/0262322). 1. Selz teaches package for holding a food product, the package comprising a base (in the below annotated Fig. 1), a sidewall (in the below annotated Fig. 1), a shoulder (in the below annotated Fig. 1), a neck (18) and a closure for forming a sealed, inner space for the food product, the base and the sidewall being formed from a material, wherein the shoulder comprises a plurality of flap sections (Fig. 1), extend from the sidewall and are folded towards each other in a direction towards the neck, with each flap section having lateral edges facing lateral edges of neighboring flap sections (Fig 1 and Fig. 3), and a plurality of seams (Fig. 1 and 3) that join the lateral edges of neighboring flap sections. Selz DIFFERS in that it does not disclose a multilayer packaging material that comprises a layer of fibrous material that is molded. Attention, however is directed to Middleton that discloses such a material (paragraph 0123). Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill within the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Selz, in view of the teachings of Middleton, to employ such a material, in order to use an alternative durable material. 2. The package according to claim 1, wherein the neck is a molded neck that is joined with the molded seams, the molded seams extending from the molded neck, along the lateral edges of the flap sections and in a direction towards the sidewall (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 3. The package according to claim 1, wherein each flap section comprises a top edge, the neck being molded to each of the top edges of the flap sections (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 4. The package according to claim 1, wherein the molded seams are integrally molded with the molded neck (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 5. The package according to claim 1, wherein the flap sections are integrally formed with the sidewall (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 6. The package according to claim 1, wherein the molded seams are overmolded on the lateral edges of the flap sections (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 7. The package according to claim 1, wherein the combined thickness of each molded seam and the respective flap sections that are joined by the molded seam is at least 20% greater than a thickness of the molded seam at a location between the lateral edges of the flap sections that are joined by the molded seam (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 8. The package according to claim 1, wherein each lateral edge comprises a curved shape (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 9. The package according to claim 1, wherein each lateral edge comprises a first curved portion and a second curved portion, wherein the first curved portion is different from the second curved portion, and/or the first curved portion is convexly shaped and the second curved portion is concavely shaped with respect to a central axis of the respective flap section (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 10. The package according to claim 1, wherein each flap section comprises a base portion integrally joined with the sidewall, and a top portion having a top edge opposite to the base portion, and the lateral edges of each flap section are spaced apart from one another and joined with the base portion and the top portion of the respective flap section (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 11. The package according to claim 10, wherein the width of the base portion is larger than the width of the top portion (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). 12. The package according to claim 1, wherein the flap sections comprise a first group of flap sections and a second group of flap; wherein the flap sections of the first group of flap sections have different shapes and dimensions than the flap sections of the second group of flap sections (Selz in view of Middleton teaches this). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The last 4 lines of claim 15 are not obvious, in light of the other claim limitations of claim 15. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 1/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Selz does not teach the molded seam of claim 1. Examiner agrees and the rejection of claim 1 is a 103 rejection, where Middleton teaches a container having seams can be molded (Middleton, paragraph 0123). Therefore Selz teaches that the container has seams. When the container is modified in Selz to be a molded container then the seams will be molded. PNG media_image1.png 577 445 media_image1.png Greyscale 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 KAREEN KAY THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5611. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm. 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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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. /KAREEN K THOMAS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 10, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 08, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600561
Fluid Storage Tank Including a Flexible Bladder Supported on a Collapsible Rigid Frame
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600562
Waste Bin Arrangement
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600556
INSULATING CONTAINER FOR TAKEAWAY PIZZA
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600530
CAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589915
DISPENSING TAP EQUIPPED WITH FLEXIBLE INTERNAL VALVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+17.1%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1323 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month