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 1, 4-15, and 21-22 in the reply filed on 02/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/12/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 4-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "where the sidewall seals to itself" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, therefore, the metes and bounds of the limitation are not readily understood.
Claims 4-15 fail to cure the deficiencies.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the upper rim" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, therefore the metes and bounds of the limitation are not readily understood.
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, 4-13, 15, and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bosch (FR 2502119 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 5, 8-12, 15, and 21-22, Bosch discloses a packaging container and blank for making comprising a sidewall of laminate material and first and second end closures (see Figures 1 and 4), sealed to the tubular sidewall to form a hermetically sealed package, wherein the sidewall comprises an outer structural layer (21) comprising predominantly cellulose material (Examiner considers cardboard to be a cellulose material); an inner hygienic layer (23) comprising a layer of food quality polymer; and one or more sealing strips (6) provided at an inner surface of the sidewall, the sealing strips comprising a heat-sealable polymer (see Page 5 line 34- Page 6 line 6). Bosch lacks teaching that the inner layer has a thickness between 2 and 20 microns and between 3 and 30 mm in width. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have Bosch’s inner layer be between 2 and 20 microns of thickness and 3 to 30 mm in width to provide an adequate inner seal, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the thickness of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 4, Bosch discloses a packaging container and blank for making wherein the outer structural layer has a weight of between 100 g/m2 and 500 g/m2, preferably from 150 g/m2 to 250 g/m2 (Page 5 lines 15-30).
Regarding claims 6-7, Bosch discloses a packaging container and blank for making comprising an oxygen barrier layer (22), preferably laminated within or to the outer structural layer.
Regarding claim 13, Bosch discloses a packaging container and blank for making
wherein the sidewall is tubular and comprises a longitudinal seal (5) extending from the first end closure to the second end closure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 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.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
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
Prosecution Insights