DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Preliminary Amendment
2. The preliminary amendment filed on October 10, 2024 has been entered in the above-identified application. Claims 1-15 are amended and claims 1-15 are now pending and under consideration.
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.
3. Claims 3 and 6 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 3 recites that the “is a food grade material, is biodegradable and/or has a refractive index similar or identical to the cellulosic fibrous material.” It is unclear, from both the Specification and the claims, what is meant by “similar” in this instance.
In claim 6, use of the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claims 1-6, 8, 10, 12, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mikkonen et al. (US 2011/0256362 A1).
Mikkonen et al. disclose a modified fibrous product (equivalent to the three-dimensional food packaging of the claimed invention) wherein transparent areas are generated in the fibrous product, such as in a paper or a cardboard sheet or in a paper or a cardboard web (equivalent to the cellulosic fibrous material of the claimed invention). A carbohydrate derivative that includes a plasticizer is incorporated into the fibrous product (meeting the limitation that the cellulosic fibrous material is impregnated with a polymer), and the carbohydrate derivative (equivalent to the cellulose derivative of claim 4), which is plasticized with the plasticizer, is brought, in a liquid state and under pressure, to migrate in between the fibers of the product in such a way that at least part of the plasticizer penetrates into the lumens of the fibers, in which case the fibrous product becomes transparent (meeting the limitation that the impregnated portion has a light transmittance above 60% for visible light and meeting the limitations of claims 2 and 5) in the treated area. By using the solution, it is possible to simplify the method of further processing paper or cardboard for consumer packages. The present invention can be applied to, among other products, envelopes having a window through which the address is visible. Other applications are all kinds of foodstuff and consumer packages in which windows for product display are currently used (meeting the limitations of claims 12, 13, and 15). In general, the disclosed invention aims at essentially changing or controlling, or both, the permeability of visible light and of UV and IR radiation. Thus, the term "transparent" refers to products which have been prepared to be either "transparent" or "translucent". It should also be noted that the permeability within different wavelength ranges can be changed by using different color/additive agents. In certain products, the aim is to limit the penetration of the UV radiation, which otherwise might easily trigger reactions in, for instance, foodstuffs, but at the same time allow the penetration of visible light. (see Abstract and paragraphs 0023-0031, 0035, 0051-058, 0061-0067, and Examples).
With regards to the limitation that the impregnated portion comprises an oxygen barrier, a grease barrier, and/or a moisture barrier, the Examiner takes the position that such a property limitation is inherent in the carbohydrate derivative that is incorporated into the fibrous product, given that the chemical composition of the materials used by Mikkonen et al. and that of the claimed invention are identical.
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.
5. Claims 7, 9, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mikkonen et al. (US 2011/0256362 A1).
With regards to the limitations that the food packaging comprises a plurality of impregnated portions, the impregnated portion has a thickness that is of 5 microns or above, the food packaging comprises more than 70 wt% of cellulose, and the packaging wall comprises a grammage between 30 g/m² and 800 g/m², the Examiner would like to point out that workable physical properties and concentrations are deemed to be obvious routine optimizations to one of ordinary skill in the art, motivated by the desire to obtain the required properties.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEEBA AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1504. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7am-6pm.
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.
/SHEEBA AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights