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 .
REJECTIONS WITHDRAWN
All previous rejections have been withdrawn.
REJECTIONS REPEATED
There are no rejections repeated.
NEW REJECTIONS
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) 1-4 and 7-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 10,751,974, cited by applicant) in view of JP2020-203405 (English machine translation provided herein).
Yun discloses a laminate comprising a substrate layer, an adhesive agent layer, and a sealant layer in this order, the substrate layer and the sealant layer containing polyethylene, the substrate layer having a crystallinity of 35% or more (column 1, lines 31-44, column 2, lines 3-53, column 3, lines 40-52 and column 4, lines 4-7, column 7, lines 19-30 and Table 2).
Yu does not specifically disclose the sealant layer being an unstretched layer.
JP2020-203405 discloses wherein the sealant layer being an unstretched layer in a package (paragraphs [0003], [0007], [0013-0015], [0024-0025], [0040], [0053-0054], [0090-0091], [0136-0155], Examples 1 and 4) for the purpose of providing improved strength, heat resistance and transparency.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have provided wherein the sealant layer being an unstretched layer in Yun in order to provide improved strength, heat resistance and transparency as taught or suggested by JP2020-20340.
Yun does not specifically disclose the crystallinity being a ratio of a crystal peak area to a total peak area, the crystallinity being measured at a diffraction angle in a range of 10° to 30° by a parallel beam method of X-ray diffraction. However, Yu discloses DSC and that any other method for determining crystallinity can be used (column 7, lines 19-30). Furthermore, the method by which the crystallinity does not structurally further limit claim 1 since applicant claims very broad range for crystallinity of 35% or more and Yu discloses a specific crystallinity of 52.9% (Table 2) and a range for crystallinity of 42-63% (column 2, lines 38-53). There’s also no evidence that the crystallinity found using DSC would be vastly different than the crystallinity found using applicant’s method. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have used x-ray diffraction to determine crystallinity in order to provide greater accuracy.
Yu discloses claims 2-4, 7 and 14 (column 1, lines 31-44, column 2, lines 3-53, column 3, lines 40-52 and column 4, lines 4-7, column 7, lines 19-30 and Table 2). Yu discloses claim 17 since the substrate is polyethylene (column 1, lines 31-44, column 2, lines 3-53, column 3, lines 40-52 and column 4, lines 4-7, column 7, lines 19-30 and Table 2).
JP2020-203405 discloses wherein the substrate layer is an uniaxially stretched film, further comprising a gas barrier layer placed between the substrate layer and the sealant layer, wherein the adhesive agent layer has a gas barrier property, wherein the sealant layer is white, wherein a ratio of polyethylene in the laminate is 90 mass% or more, comprising a first adhesive agent layer and a second adhesive agent layer as the adhesive agent layer, the first adhesive agent layer being placed between the substrate layer and the intermediate layer, the second adhesive agent layer being placed between the intermediate layer and the sealant layer, the package being a standing pouch, a packaged article comprising the package and a content contained in the package, wherein the adhesive agent layer contains a polyamine-based adhesive or a urethane-based adhesive, wherein the gas barrier layer comprises an inorganic compound layer and a coating layer laminated in this order from the substrate layer side (paragraphs [0007], [0013-0015], [0024-0025], [0040], [0053-0054], [0090-0091], [0136-0155]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 10,751,974, cited by applicant) in view of JP2020-203405 (English machine translation provided herein), as applied to claims 1-4 and 7-19 above, and further in view of KR0115791 (English machine translation provided herein).
Yun does not disclose a protective layer as an outermost layer, the protective layer facing the sealant layer with the substrate layer placed between the protective layer and the sealant layer.
KR0115791 discloses a protective layer as an outermost layer, the protective layer facing the sealant layer with the substrate layer placed between the protective layer and the sealant layer (see entire document, especially page 4 and Fig. 5) in a packaging material for the purpose of providing improved protective and sealing properties.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have provided a protective layer as an outermost layer, the protective layer facing the sealant layer with the substrate layer placed between the protective layer and the sealant layer in Yun in order to provide improved protective and sealing properties as taught or suggested by KR0115791.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 10,751,974, cited by applicant) in view of JP2020-203405 (English machine translation provided herein) and KR0115791 (English machine translation provided herein), as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of JP2020-196791 (English machine translation provided herein).
Modified Yun does not disclose wherein the protective layer contains a thermosetting resin.
JP2020-196791 discloses wherein the protective layer contains a thermosetting resin (paragraphs [0001-0002], [0007-0008], [0017-0019], [0028-0034], [0043-0052], [0072]) in packaging for the purpose of providing improved recyclability, blocking resistance and/or protective properties.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have provided wherein the protective layer contains a thermosetting resin in Yun in order to provide improved recyclability, blocking resistance and/or protective properties as taught or suggested by JP2020-196791.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 10,751,974, cited by applicant) in view of JP2020-203405 (English machine translation provided herein), as applied to claims 1-4 and 7-19 above, and further in view of KR0115791 (English machine translation provided herein) and JP2020-196791 (English machine translation provided herein).
Yun discloses a laminate comprising a substrate layer, an adhesive agent layer, and a sealant layer in this order, the substrate layer and the sealant layer containing polyethylene, the substrate layer having a crystallinity of 35% or more (column 1, lines 31-44, column 2, lines 3-53, column 3, lines 40-52 and column 4, lines 4-7, column 7, lines 19-30 and Table 2).
Yun discloses the substrate layer exhibiting a diffraction peak having a half-width value of less than 10° in an in-plane measurement of X-ray diffraction method since the substrate is polyethylene (column 1, lines 31-44, column 2, lines 3-53, column 3, lines 40-52 and column 4, lines 4-7, column 7, lines 19-30 and Table 2).
Yun does not specifically disclose the crystallinity being a ratio of a crystal peak area to a total peak area, the crystallinity being measured at a diffraction angle in a range of 10° to 30° by a parallel beam method of X-ray diffraction. However, Yu discloses DSC and that any other method for determining crystallinity can be used (column 7, lines 19-30). Furthermore, the method by which the crystallinity does not structurally further limit claim 1 since applicant claims very broad range for crystallinity of 35% or more and Yu discloses a specific crystallinity of 52.9% (Table 2) and a range for crystallinity of 42-63% (column 2, lines 38-53). There’s also no evidence that the crystallinity found using DSC would be vastly different than the crystallinity found using applicant’s method. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have used x-ray diffraction to determine crystallinity in order to provide greater accuracy.
JP2020-203405 discloses a gas barrier layer and a printed layer the gas barrier layer comprises an inorganic compound layer and a coating layer, the substrate layer is an uniaxially stretched film and has a thickness in a range of 10 µm to 50 µm, the intermediate layer has a thickness in a range of 10 µm to 50 µm and the sealant layer contains a linear low-density polyethylene and has a thickness in a range of 30 µm to 150 µm, each of the first adhesive agent layer and the second adhesive agent layer has a thickness in a range of 0.1 µm to 20 µm, and a ratio of polyethylene in the laminate is 90 mass% or more (paragraphs [0007], [0013-0015], [0024-0025], [0040], [0053-0054], [0090-0091], [0136-0155], Examples 1 and 4).
Modified Yun does not disclose a protective layer as an outermost layer, the protective layer facing the sealant layer with the substrate layer placed between the protective layer and the sealant layer.
KR0115791 discloses a protective layer as an outermost layer, the protective layer facing the sealant layer with the substrate layer placed between the protective layer and the sealant layer (see entire document, especially page 4 and Fig. 5) in a packaging material for the purpose of providing improved protective and sealing properties.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have provided a protective layer as an outermost layer, the protective layer facing the sealant layer with the substrate layer placed between the protective layer and the sealant layer in Yun in order to provide improved protective and sealing properties as taught or suggested by KR0115791.
Modified Yun does not disclose wherein the protective layer contains a thermosetting resin.
JP2020-196791 discloses wherein the protective layer contains a thermosetting resin and has a thickness in a range of 0.3 µm to 3 µm (paragraphs [0001-0002], [0007-0008], [0017-0019], [0028-0034], [0043-0052], [0072]) in packaging for the purpose of providing improved recyclability, blocking resistance and/or protective properties.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant’s invention was made to have provided wherein the protective layer contains a thermosetting resin and has a thickness in a range of 0.3 µm to 3 µm in Yun in order to provide improved recyclability, blocking resistance and/or protective properties as taught or suggested by JP2020-196791.
ANSWERS TO APPLICANT’S ARGUMENTS
Applicant’s arguments of 10/6/26 have been carefully considered but are deemed unpersuasive.
There was no agreement during the interview of 9/3/26 (see interview summary of 9/3/26).
Applicant argues, “Claim 1 of Yun defines a multilayer structure comprising at least one skin sealant layer, a tie layer, and a bulk layer by limiting that "the layers are coextruded and the multilayer structure oriented by a semi-molten orientation process." See also Yun at abstract (11. 9-10) and summary (col. 1, 11. 42-43). Moreover, the Examples section of Yun (Tables 1 and 2 and col. 6, II. 36-39) provides a single inventive example (Inventive Structure 1) of a multilayer structure including a
bulk layer, a tie layer, and a sealant layer subjected to 6x6 simultaneous stretch. That is, an essential requirement in Yun is that the bulk layer, tie layer, and skin sealant layer are all stretched layers. Therefore, Yun provides no reason for the sealant layer being an unstretched layer, as presently recited in claim 1. The examples section of JP '405 appears to refer to an unstretched film for a sealant layer. However, there would have been no reason to incorporate an unstretched film of JP '405 into Yun at least because Yun requires that the co-extruded multilayer structure be wholly oriented by stretching after extrusion.”
However, there is no specific teaching in Yun which precludes the presence of an unstretched layer. Furthermore, the laminate of JP’405 provides improved strength, heat resistance and transparency (paragraphs [0003], [0007], [0013-0015], [0024-0025], [0040], [0053-0054], [0090-0091], [0136-0155], Examples 1 and 4).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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
October 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights