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 with traverse of claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 10/14/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no search or examination burden. This is not found persuasive because claims 1-10 were drawn to a shipping packaging and claims 11-16 were drawn to a method for manufacturing a packaging. As such, the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their: (i) different classification, (ii) recognized divergent subject matter, and (iii) different field of search.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
Drawings filed 7/21/2026 and 7/6/2026 contain new matter. As a result, they are not entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the sheets joined together by glue dots by at least some of the tops of the ridges must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Also, the first sheet of paper features alternating ridges and depressions on one of its sides corresponding to respective depressions and ridges on its other side, the tops of the ridges being located in the same plane or substantially in the same plane must be shown. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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) 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vormwald et al. (2022/0324631) in view of Deis (DE 2018110816) and Dworkin (US 3,860,164).
Regarding claim 1, Vormwald discloses a shipping packaging of pouch or envelope type (Fig. 8A), comprising a front wall and a rear wall, assembled so as to define at least one inner compartment, the package comprising an opening that engages with at least one inner compartment so that at least one object can be inserted, a flap (34) with an open position in which the inner compartment is accessible through its opening, and a closed position in which the flap at least partially covers this opening, characterized in that at least one of the front and rear walls comprises at least two sheets (14, 18, 26), a first of the sheets (18, 26) of paper being embossed ([0027]) to form a cushioning element, the first sheet of paper has ridges on at least one of its sides corresponding to depressions on its other side, the second sheet (14) or at least a second smooth or substantially smooth sheet, with at least the portions of these two sheets placed facing the inner compartment See Figs. 1-8A.
Dies, which is drawn to a shipping package, discloses sheets being joined together solely by at least some of the tops of the ridges on one side of the first sheet being attached to the second smooth or substantially smooth sheet ([0012]). See Fig. 5. Thus, it 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 to join the sheets of Vormwald as disclosed by Dies in order to create various levels of rigidity.
Vormwald does not discloses gussets or flap as claimed. Dworkin, which is drawn to a packaging, discloses the packaging comprising a first edge containing the opening and a second opposite edge defining the bottom of the packaging, the second edge comprising a bottom gusset (15) and the edges of the packaging connecting the first and second edges each comprising a side gusset (18), the gussets being configured to give the packaging a box shape when deployed, or activated, a flap (28) being shaped to ensure this box closes in its closed position; the flap having a V-shaped cut (between 24 and 26) and crease so that a portion of the flap can be placed between the lateral gussets by folding to close the packaging, the portion then forming a lateral side of the box. See Figs. 1-3. Thus, it 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 to use gussets and flap as disclosed by Dworkin on the packaging of Vormwald in order to allow for expansion to accommodate various sized items while allowing for the packaging to lie flat for stacking and transport.
Regarding claim 2, as modified above, at least a portion of these two sheets placed facing at least one inner compartment are joined together solely by glue dots connecting at least some of the tops of the ridges of one side of the first sheet to the second smooth or substantially smooth sheet.
Regarding claims 3, 5 and 6, Vormwald sufficiently discloses the claimed invention. See Fig. 5.
Regarding claim 4, Vormwald discloses the claimed invention except for height and thickness as claimed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the claimed height and thickness since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 7, each of the front and rear walls comprises at least two sheets, a first of the sheets being embossed to form a cushioning element, the first sheet of paper comprising ridges on at least one of its sides corresponding to depressions on the other of its sides, the second sheet or at least a second of the sheets being smooth or substantially smooth, at least the portions of the two sheets being placed facing the at least one compartment, being joined (as modified above) together only by points of glue connecting the tops of the ridges of one side of the first sheet to the second smooth or substantially smooth sheet.
Regarding claim 8, Vormwald does not disclose a third sheet. Dies discloses front and rear walls each comprising three sheets, the said first sheet is embossed and is held between a smooth or substantially smooth sheet called the outer surface of the packaging and another smooth or substantially smooth sheet called the inner surface of the packaging, the portion of the first embossed sheet being placed facing at least one inner compartment which is joined solely to the smooth or substantially smooth sheet forming the outer surface of the packaging. See Figs. 5-6. Thus, it 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 to have three sheets as disclosed by Dies in order to better protect items therein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/21/206 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant essentially argues there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, it is in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art that adding gussets and a flap arrangement as disclosed by Dworkin would allow for expansion to accommodate various sized items while allowing for the packaging to lie flat for stacking and transport.
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 DEREK J BATTISTI whose telephone number is (571)270-5709. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm M-F.
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, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/DEREK J BATTISTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights