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 .
Specification
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: the grammage units should be changed to “50 g/m2 and 900 g/m2”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Everett et al., (hereinafter Everett), US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0063358 A1.
With regard to claims 11-12, 14 and 18, Everett teaches a paper comprising cellulose fibers and synthetic fibers, cellulose ester fibers (CE Staple fibers), in a blend/mix and one or more additives, including polymers of the same type as recited on claim 14; see abstract, ¶-[0003], [0020], ¶-[0259]-[0260], [0323]-[0324], ¶-[0435]-[0436] and claims 1, 6 and 15. Everett also teaches that silicone and other hydrophobic agents, such as starch, AKD, ASA, etc., can be added, alone or a combination/mixture, to the surface of the already formed sheet, i.e., a coating; see [0570]-[0573] and table 5. Everett also teaches on ¶-[0608] that the Gurley porosity of the formed sheet can be in the range of less than 75 sec and on table 20 on page 61, shows Gurley porosities varying from 90 sec, (method 2, Lab 2) through 0.67 (method 1, Lab 2), which falls within the claimed range. As to the amount of silicone in the coating, Everett teaches that the additives are added at minor amounts anywhere from not more than 50% to not more than 1% see ¶-[0430] and therefore, choosing the amount of silicone in the paper within the claimed range would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as to optimize desired property/properties of the final product, i.e., barrier properties, such hydrophobicity and/or oleophobicity, strength, lubricity, of the paper/sheet.
Regarding to claim 13, Everett teaches that the cellulose fibers can be provided from wood, non-wood, e.g., cotton fibers and combinations/mixtures of them; see ¶-[0089]. Therefore using a combination of such fibers and the synthetic fibers taught by Everett would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, since he/she would have reasonable expectation of success if such blend/mixture were used to make the paper taught by Everett.
With regard to claim 15, Everett teaches the use of fillers of the same type as claimed; see ¶-[0323]-[0324], [0432]-[0433].
Regarding to claim 16, Everett teaches the ranges of the fibers, cellulosic and synthetic and additives falling within the claimed range; see ¶-[0110]-[0112], [0211]-[0212] for the fibers and ¶-[0430] for the additive, which include polymeric substances.
With regard to claim 17, Everett teaches grammage/basis weight of the paper falling within the claimed range; see ¶-[0089].
Regarding to claim 19, while Everett does not measure the smoothness of the sheet as claimed, Everett teaches that the surface sizing improves smoothness; see ¶-[0554] and ¶-[0536] and teaches that the paper product can be calendered that decrease thickness/caliper and improves smoothness; see ¶-[0575]-[0579]. Therefore, it would be expected that the paper taught by Everett would have similar smoothness, since it/they is/are made using the same raw material and same/similar process or at the very least smoothing the surface of the paper taught by Everett at the claimed level would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as an obvious optimization of the surface of the reference’s paper.
With regard to claim 20, Everett teaches that the final product could be used for different purposes, including packaging for food and drink; see ¶-[0669]-[0685].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in the art of “Paper Material with Total Closure Particularly for Use in the Food Industry.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE A FORTUNA whose telephone number is (571)272-1188. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY- FRIDAY 11:30 PM- 9:00 PM.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. 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.
/JOSE A FORTUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
JAF