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 .
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.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada et al. (JP 2018/135133 A).
Regarding Claims 1 and 4, Yamada discloses a multilayer container having the following layer structure: inner layer / regrind layer / adhesive layer / gas barrier layer / adhesive layer / outer layer (para 0022). The inner and outer layers comprise polyethylene (para 0014) (i.e. the container is a plastic container). The gas barrier layer comprises ethylene vinyl alcohol (EVOH) and forms 1-10 wt% of the container (para 0015).
The regrind layer (i.e. repro layer) comprises 25-90 wt% virgin plant-derived polyethylene (i.e. biomass) mixed with regrind resin, which is scrap resin generated during container molding and contains the polyethylene resin, adhesive resin, and gas-barrier resin. The regrind layer forms 40-90% by mass of the container (para 0016).
Since the regrind layer comprises 25-90 wt% virgin plant-derived polyethylene, it would therefore comprise 10-75% scrap resin. Since the gas-barrier layer forms 1-10% of the container, it would also form 1-10% of the scrap resin. Therefore, the regrind layer comprises 0.1-7.5% scrap gas-barrier resin (10*1% to 75*10%). Since the regrind layer forms 40-90% of the container, the scrap gas-barrier resin (i.e. scrap EVOH) would form 0.04-6.75% (0.1*40% to 7.5*90%) of the container. Therefore, the content of EVOH in the container would be 1.04-16.75 wt% (0.04+1 to 6.75+10).
In light of the overlap between the claimed content of EVOH and that disclosed by Yamada, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce a container having a content of EVOH that is both disclosed by Yamada and is encompassed within the scope of the present claims, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 2, Yamada discloses all the limitations of the present Claims according to Claim 1 above, including the regrind layer between the inner layer and the inner adhesive layer as claimed. Yamada further discloses the thickness of each adhesive layer is chosen to obtain desired adhesive force. Since the inner adhesive layer adheres the gas barrier layer to the regrind layer, while the outer adhesive layer adheres the gas barrier layer to the outer layer, and the regrind layer comprises different materials than the outer layer including scrap adhesive resin, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the thickness of the inner adhesive layer may be smaller than the thickness of the outer adhesive layer, while each obtains desired adhesive force to their respective adjacent layers.
Regarding Claim 3, Yamada discloses all the limitations of the present Claims according to Claim 1 above, including the regrind layer between the inner layer and the inner adhesive layer as claimed. Yamada further discloses the thickness of the gas barrier layer may be 1-20 microns (para 0015) and the thickness of each adhesive layer may be 0.5-20 microns (para 0017). Therefore the ratio of the gas barrier layer thickness to each adhesive layer thickness may be 0.05-40 (1/20 to 20/0.5).
Response to Arguments
In light of applicant’s amendments filed 03/26/2026, the Claim Objections, the 35 USC 112(b) rejections, and the 35 USC 103 rejections of record are withdrawn.
New grounds of rejection are set forth above.
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 BETHANY M MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2109. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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.
/BETHANY M MILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1787
/CALLIE E SHOSHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights