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 .
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed “at least one box connection web (11)” must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. In claim 5, line 4, and claim 7, lines 1-2 and 3-4, “the base connection webs” lack antecedent basis from the preceding “at least one base connection web”, as the “base connection web” is never correlated to multiple sides to necessarily distinguish plural box connection webs.
In claim 8, line 2 and claim 9, line 3, “the flattened bag face” lacks singular antecedent basis.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(2)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2018/189004. WO 2018/189006 discloses a packaging (1) for a product having a bag (2) for receiving the product and a cardboard sleeve (3, see page 2, lines 19-24) arranged externally around the bag, wherein the bag has a flattened shape with two mutually opposing flattened bag faces (opposite major sides of 2) and wherein the cardboard sleeve has a box base face (35) which forms a standing face of the packaging, and has two box faces (32 and 33) which adjoin the box base face in a mutually opposing manner and extend upward from the box base face and are connected by first folding lines (37 and 37) to the box base face and cover the flattened bag faces, wherein between the upwardly extending box faces exposed regions (at the open sides of 3) of the bag are arranged.
As to claim 2, the bag (2) comprises a flexible bag material.
As to claim 3, the bag (2) comprises a transparent material (page 7, lines 14-21) so that a product contained in the bag is visible at the exposed regions of the bag.
As to claim 11, each base reference produces the final packaging employing the steps set forth.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 8-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fettinger et al. (3,684,156) in view of WO 2018/189004. Claims 1-3, 8, 11-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldstein (3,339,721) in view of WO 2018/189004. Claims 1-4, 8 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjarno (3,272,423) in view of WO 2018/189004. Claims 1-3 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2014-0004777 in view of WO 2018/189004. Each primary reference discloses a packaging (10; 10 and 11; disclosed container, Figure 2; 10 and 100; respectively) for a product having a bag (12; 11; 36; 100) for receiving the product and a sleeve (14; 10; Figure 1; 10) arranged externally around the bag, wherein the bag has a flattened shape with two mutually opposing flattened bag faces (15, 15; faces of 11 abutting 13 and 16; faces of 36 abutting 10 and 12; opposite major sides of 100) and wherein the sleeve has a box base face (33 and 34; 14; 28 and 30; 16) which forms a standing face of the packaging, and has two box faces (20 and 21; inner surfaces of 13 and 16; inner surfaces of 10 and 12; 11 and 12) which adjoin the box base face in a mutually opposing manner and extend upward from the box base face and are connected by first folding lines (at 35 and 35; 15 and 17; 24 and 26; between 11 and 16, and 12 and 16) to the box base face and cover the flattened bag faces, wherein between the upwardly extending box faces exposed regions (12 at 41 on two opposed sides; at open sides of 10; at open sides of the packaging; indicated at 14b and 15b in Figures 2 or 3) of the bag are arranged. None of the above references disclose the sleeve to be cardboard. However, WO 2018/189004 discloses a similar packaging including a cardboard sleeve (the outer packaging 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the packaging of any one of the primary references with the sleeve comprising cardboard in the manner of WO 2018/189004 as claimed, as such a modification would predictably provide a protecting and strengthening layer to the bag.
As to claim 2, each employed reference discloses the bag (2) comprises a flexible bag material.
As to claim 3, WO 2018/189004 further discloses the bag (2) comprises a transparent material (page 7, lines 14-21) so that a product contained in the bag is visible at the exposed regions of the bag. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the packaging of any one of the base references with the bag being transparent in the manner of WO 2018/189004 as claimed, as such a modification would predictably provide external visibility of the content.
As to claim 4, Bjarno discloses the bag (36) secured to the box base face (28 and 30) of the sleeve (see column 3, lines 70-72).
As to claim 5, Fettinger et al. disclose the upwardly extending box faces (20, 21) connected to each other at a position (top) of the packaging with spacing from the standing face (at 33 and 34) at each of two sides by at least one box connection web (38 and 39) wherein each box connection web is connected by second folding lines (40, 40) to one of the upwardly extending box faces and to the other upwardly extending box face.
As to claim 8, Fettinger et al., Goldstein and Bjarno each disclose each flattened bag face is connected at least in an upper region opposite the standing face to the upwardly extending box faces by at least one linear connection (one of above and below lines 40; 20 and 21; 38-44).
As to claim 9, Fettinger et al. disclose the upwardly extending box faces (20 and 21) connected with two respective linear connections (one above and below line 40) arranged one above the other, wherein an opening line (40) is arranged between the linear connections.
As to claim 10, Fettinger et al. disclose the upwardly extending box faces (20, 21) each has a second width reduced (at 41 and 41) compared with a width of the bag in regions.
As to claim 11-14, each base reference produces the final packaging employing the steps set forth, the disposition and direction in space during rendering not rendering any new or unobvious result by its selection.
As to claim 16, Fettinger et al. and Goldstein each disclose the bag material isa barrier layer (impervious to fluids, column 2, lines 39-48; heatsealed plastic, column 2, lines 50-56).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the art as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kanada et al. (3,640,381). The previous art do not disclose a bag and sleeve combination having both with an opening line. However, Kanada et al. disclose a similar bag and sleeve with the bag (112) having an opening line (103, 104) at which the bag can be separated. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the packaging of any one of the base references with an opening line in the bag in the manner of Kanada et al. as claimed, as such a modification would predictably provide an easier opening of the bag.
Claim 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 15 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.
Prior Art not relied upon: Please refer to the additional references listed on the attached PTO-892, which, while not relied upon for the claim rejection, these references are deemed relevant to the claimed invention as a whole.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYON P GEHMAN whose telephone number is (571) 272-4555. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday through Thursday from 7:30 am to 5:00 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, Orlando Aviles, can be reached on (571) 270-5531. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRYON P GEHMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Bryon P. Gehman
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3736
BPG