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 .
Drawings
The subject matter of this application admits of illustration by a drawing to facilitate understanding of the invention. Applicant is required to furnish a drawing under 37 CFR 1.81(c). No new matter may be introduced in the required drawing. 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).
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) 1-2, 4-6, and 8-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Damme (WO 2017/005746 A1) in view of Zafir et al. (US 10974892 B1; hereinafter Zafir).
Regarding claims 1, 6, 8, and 12-15, Van Damme discloses a food packaging container (2) an inner bag (B) comprising a sealable container; a closure cap (3) for the container; and a fillable tubular bag, wherein the tubular bag is connected flat to the inside of the container (Page 10 lines 6-29) and a bottom of the container is concave on the inside (Page 8 lines 31-35). Van Damme discloses the claimed invention except for gluing the inner bag to the inside of the container.
Zafir teaches an intermediate bulk container cartridge comprising an inner bag adhered to an inside surface of an outer container (Col 2 lines 1-25). Examiner considers the bag to be “glued flat” to the outer container in the portion of the bag where the adhesion takes place. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to modify Van Damme’s bag-in-box container by adhering the inner bag to an inner surface of the outer container in order to ensure that said inner bag does not shift or move within said outer container, as taught by Zafir.
Regarding claim 4, Van Damme, as modified above, discloses a container wherein the closure cap is placed on the container (Van Damme; see Figs 1, 2, and 7).
Regarding claims 2 and 5, Van Damme, as modified above, discloses a container wherein the closure cap is made of a recyclable plastic (Van Damme; Page 9 lines 30-35; Examiner considers anything capable of being re-used to be recyclable).
Regarding claims 9-11, Van Damme, as modified above, discloses a container further comprising a dosing aid (Van Damme; Page 6 lines 20-25).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Damme in view of Zafir, as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Van Damme (BR 112017026320 B1; hereinafter Van Damme ‘320).
Regarding claim 3, Van Damme, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention except for the container being made of cardboard. Van Damme ‘320 teaches a food packaging with an inner bag wherein an outer container of the packaging is made of cardboard (see Par. 035). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to further modify Van Damme’s container to be made of cardboard, as a known material substitution in the art of food packaging comprising an inner bag inside of an outer container, as taught by Van Damme ‘320.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art fails to teach a tubular bag that is “glued flat” to the inside of an outer container.
-Examiner notes that Van Damme in view of Zafir indeed teaches a bag that is glued to an interior of an outer container (Zafir; Col 2 lines 1-25). Examiner considers the portions of the bag that are adhered to be “glued flat” in the locations of said adhesion.
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 CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE whose telephone number is (571)270-1982. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday.
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 J 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734