DETAILED ACTION
The Office acknowledges receipt of the Applicant’s response and amendments filed 18 December 2025.
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
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because figs. 3, 6B and 7B are photographs which are not clearly rendered to show the purported details. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “134” has been used to apparently designate two different parts in fig. 7B. 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. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 14, the claims recite, “each of the first segment and the second segment of the heat-sealable sealing strip is provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction.” (emphasis added). In the original Specification (p. 25 line 32 – p. 26 line 4), it reads, “the heat-sealed first segment 701 and/or the heat-sealed second segment 702 may be provided away from the overlapping section 139”, but does not denote that these heat-sealed segments are provided away “in only one direction”. To the extent that the Applicant may be relying on schematic fig. 7A to show such a feature, it is noted that the sealing strip extends both upward and leftward away from section 139 in fig. 7A (i.e. two directions). It is further noted that fig. 7B is deemed to be a photograph of the view shown schematically in fig. 7A. In fig. 7B, it would appear that the sealing strip extends in both directions in a similar manner to that of the prior art of Cheeley (fig. 6). It is this shown “both directions” distribution of the heat seal which the Applicant argues in the remarks of 18 December 2025 is different than the purported “only one direction” presently claimed.
Given fig. 7A shows two directions, the apparent discrepancy between figs. 7A and 7B and the fact that the disclosure does not recite the claimed “only one direction”, the Office contends the cited limitation to constitute new matter.
Regarding claims 2-9, 11-13 and 15-17, each of these claims are dependent on the rejected base claim and contain the same rejected subject matter.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheeley (US Patent 3,314,591) in view of Reil (US Patent 4,721,242).
Regarding claim 1, Cheeley discloses a method (fig. 2) for producing a recyclable packaging (10) for enclosing a substance, the method comprising:
providing a flat sheet (16) made of a recyclable material (col. 2 lines 65-72; aluminum foil, nylon and plastic are all known recyclable materials) and having two opposite side edge sections (19, 20),
forming the flat sheet into a tube (21; fig. 2) by folding the flat sheet so that the two side edge sections at least partially overlap each other at an overlapping section (overlap of 19 and 20 seen in figs. 2 and 5-7; col. 2 lines 48-61),
heat sealing (via 31; col. 3 lines 9-13, 22-47) the tube along the overlapping section to form a longitudinal sealing joint (13),
heat sealing (via 37 and 38; col. 3 line 49 – 55) the tube across the longitudinal sealing joint to close the tube with a first traverse sealing joint (14 – bottom, fig. 1) at a first tube end,
filling (via 39; col. 3 lines 56-65) the tube with a substance to be packed,
heat sealing (via 37 and 38; via 37 and 38; col. 3 line 56 – col. 4 line 9) the tube across the longitudinal sealing joint to close the tube with a second traverse sealing joint (14 – top, fig. 1) at a second tube end opposite to the first tube end with respect to the substance to be packed so as to form the recyclable packaging enclosing said substance,
providing a heat-sealable sealing strip (32; col. 3 lines 22-47; col. 4 lines 25-34) such that:
a first segment of the sealing strip is provided at a first triple point section (fig. 7), at which the longitudinal sealing joint and the first traverse sealing joint intersect (fig. 1; where bottom 14 and 13 intersect; cross section seen in fig. 7), and
a second segment of the sealing strip is provided at a second triple point section (fig. 7), at which the longitudinal sealing joint and the second traverse sealing joint intersect (fig. 1; where top 14 and 13 intersect; cross section seen in fig. 7),
wherein the respective segments of the sealing strip seal the respective triple point section upon the heat sealing of the respective tube end to form the respective traverse sealing joint (col. 3 line 22 - col. 4 line 34; figs. 1 and 7), and
each of the first segment and the second segment of the heat-sealable sealing strip (32) is provided away from the overlapping section (figs. 5 and 7; 32 moves away from the overlap of 19 and 20) in only one direction (see fig. 7; #32 moves away from the overlapping section of 19 and 20 in only a rightward direction in a comparable manner to that of the Applicant’s invention).
Wherein the Applicant has argued that Cheeley does not disclose the heat-sealable sealing strip is provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction the Office further points to Reil.
However, Reil teaches forming the flat sheet (12) into a tube (fig. 8) by folding the flat sheet so that the two side edge sections at least partially overlap each other (fig. 8) at an overlapping section (where 4 and 5 overlap) and wherein each segment a heat-sealable (col. 4 lines 29-46) sealing strip (7) is provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction (figs. 8 and 10; col. 6 lines 18-20 and 25-30, 50-52; col. 7 lines 33-37).
Given the teachings of Reil, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Cheeley to have the the heat-sealable sealing strip provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction as in Reil. Reil teaches a similar invention for creating a pack whereby it uses a sealing strip along a longitudinal seam as is similar to Cheeley. In Reil the sealing strip is sealed such that it runs away from the overlap in one direction so that a user may more easily open the pack at a later time which may be a desired feature for easier access to the contents.
Regarding claim 2, Cheeley discloses wherein the respective segments of the sealing strip (32) are provided before or during the step of forming the flat sheet into a tube (fig. 2), and/or before or during the step of heat sealing the longitudinal sealing joint (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Cheeley discloses wherein at least part of the sealing strip (32) is provided so that each of the respective segments is sandwiched between the two side edge sections at the overlapping section (figs. 2 and 5).
Regarding claim 4, Cheeley discloses wherein at least one of the steps of providing the respective segments comprises the step of arranging the respective segment at the overlapping section (overlap of 19 and 20 seen in figs. 2 and 5-7) between the two side edge sections (19, 20) so that the respective segment extends to the respective triple point section (figs. 1 and 7).
Regarding claim 5, Cheeley discloses wherein at least one of the steps of providing the respective segments comprises the step of providing the respective segment at one of the two side edge sections (fig. 4; #32 is provided at edge 20).
Regarding claim 6, Cheeley discloses wherein the first segment and the second segment are sections of the sealing strip (32) or are separate strips of the sealing strip, and wherein the step of providing the sealing strip (32) comprises the step of unrolling a strip of a film material from a film reel (33; col. 3 lines 22-31; fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Cheeley discloses wherein the sealing strip is made of a food grade material (col. 1 lines 13-30; col. 2 lines 25-31 – This is deemed to be disclosed as the material, including the sealing strip, the package is made out of is used for storing and also cooking food within the package).
Regarding claim 8, Cheeley does not disclose the thickness of sealing strip (32). However, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Cheeley sealing strip to have been of a thickness in the range of 20 micrometers to 80 micrometers as a matter of design choice, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size 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); MPEP 2144.04 IV A). A skilled artisan would have recognized that providing the Cheeley sealing strip with the claimed thickness would have achieved predictable and successful results of creating a package with a desired seal.
Regarding claim 9, Cheeley discloses wherein the step of providing the flat sheet (16) comprises the step of unrolling a longitudinal flat sheet material from a sheet reel (17; fig. 2), and/or wherein the flat sheet is made of a flat sheet material comprising a laminated or multilayered structure (col. 2 lines 66-72) with a base layer made of a paper material or a recyclable plastic material (col. 2 lines 66-72 – “decorative layer 29 of plastic material”; also “heat sealable nylon 27” is also a recyclable plastic).
Regarding claim 10, Cheeley discloses a recyclable packaging (10; fig. 1) being made of a flat sheet (16) with two opposite side edge sections (19, 20) and made of a recyclable material (col. 2 lines 65-72; aluminum foil, nylon and plastic are all known recyclable materials), the packaging enclosing a substance (col. 4 lines 10-15) and comprising:
a longitudinal sealing joint (13) along an overlapping section (overlap of 19 and 20 seen in figs. 2 and 5-7; col. 2 lines 48-61), at which the two opposite side edge sections overlap each other when the flat sheet is folded to form the flat sheet into a tube (21; fig. 2),
a first traverse sealing joint (14 – bottom, fig. 1) extending across the longitudinal sealing joint to close the tube at a first tube end,
a second traverse sealing joint (14 – top, fig. 1) extending across the longitudinal sealing joint to close the tube at a second tube end opposite to the first tube end with respect to the enclosed substance,
the packaging comprising:
a sealing strip (32) that is heat-sealable (col. 3 lines 22-47; col. 4 lines 25-34) and that is provided such that
a heat-sealed first segment of the sealing strip is provided at a first triple point section (fig. 7; bottom #14 intersecting with 13, fig. 1), at which the longitudinal sealing joint and the first traverse sealing joint intersect (fig. 1; where bottom 14 and 13 intersect; cross section seen in fig. 7), to seal the first triple point section, and
a heat-sealed second segment (fig. 7; top #14 intersecting with 13, fig. 1) of the sealing strip is provided at a second triple point section, at which the longitudinal sealing joint and the second traverse sealing joint intersect (fig. 1; where top 14 and 13 intersect; cross section seen in fig. 7), to seal the second triple point section,
wherein each of the first segment and the second segment of the heat-sealable sealing strip (32) is provided away (figs. 5 and 7; 32 moves away from the overlap of 19 and 20) from the overlapping section in only one direction (see fig. 7; #32 moves away from the overlapping section of 19 and 20 in only a rightward direction in a comparable manner to that of the Applicant’s invention).
Wherein the Applicant has argued that Cheeley does not disclose the heat-sealable sealing strip is provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction the Office further points to Reil.
However, Reil teaches a packaging being made of a flat sheet (12) and comprising an overlapping section (where 4 and 5 overlap), at which the two opposite side edge sections (4, 5) overlap each other when the flat sheet is folded to form the flat sheet into a tube (fig. 8) and wherein the heat-sealable (col. 4 lines 29-46) sealing strip (7) is provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction (figs. 8 and 10; col. 6 lines 18-20 and 25-30, 50-52; col. 7 lines 33-37).
Given the teachings of Reil, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Cheeley to have the the heat-sealable sealing strip provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction as in Reil. Reil teaches a similar invention of a pack whereby it uses a sealing strip along a longitudinal seam as is similar to Cheeley. In Reil the sealing strip is sealed such that it runs away from the overlap in one direction so that a user may more easily open the pack at a later time which may be a desired feature for easier access to the contents.
Regarding claim 11, Cheeley discloses wherein at least part of the sealing strip (32) is sandwiched between the two side edge sections (19, 20) at the overlapping section (figs. 5-7).
Regarding claim 12, Cheeley discloses wherein the side edge sections (19, 20) are facing each other with the same side of the flat sheet at the overlapping section (figs. 5-7), and wherein the flat sheet comprises a laminated or multilayered structure (col. 2 lines 61-72) comprising a base layer (“a sheet of metallic foil 26”) and a sealant layer (“a heat sealable layer”; “a layer of heat sealable nylon 27”).
Regarding claim 13, Cheeley discloses wherein the packaging is a multi-serve pack (fig. 1, is shown as a pillow pouch; According to the Applicant’s own disclosure, a “pillow pack” is deemed to be a “multi-serve pack”; see also col. 2 lines 25-31).
Regarding claim 14, Cheeley discloses a machine (15; fig. 2) for producing a recyclable (col. 2 lines 65-72; aluminum foil, nylon and plastic are all known recyclable materials) packaging (10; fig. 1) for enclosing a substance (col. 4 lines 10-15) comprising:
a first feeding system (17, 23) for supplying a flat sheet (16) made of a sheet material (col. 2 lines 65-72) and having two opposite side edge sections (19, 20),
a folding section (24, 25; col. 2 lines 48-61) for folding the supplied flat sheet so that the two opposite side edge sections overlap each other at an overlapping section (overlap of 19 and 20 seen in figs. 2 and 5-7; col. 2 lines 48-61) to form the flat sheet into a tube (21; fig. 2),
a first heat sealing section (31) for heat sealing the tube along the overlapping section to form a longitudinal sealing joint (13; col. 3 lines 9-13, 22-47),
a second heat sealing section (37 and/or 38; col. 3 line 49 – col. 4 line 9) for heat sealing the tube across the longitudinal sealing joint (13) to close the tube with a first traverse sealing joint (14 – bottom, fig. 1) at a first tube end,
a filling section (39 and/or 18; col. 3 lines 56-65) for filling the tube with a substance to be packed,
a third heat sealing section (37 and/or 38; col. 3 line 49 – col. 4 line 9; *Note: According to the Applicant’s own disclosure (see figs. 4A-B) the second and third heat sealing sections (540, 550) are deemed to be the same section. As such, Cheeley is deemed to disclose the claimed second and third heat sealing sections as interpreted in light of the Applicant’s specification) for heat sealing the tube across the longitudinal sealing joint (13) to close the tube with a second traverse sealing joint (14 – top, fig. 1) at a second tube end opposite to the first tube end with respect to the substance to be packed so as to form the packaging enclosing said substance,
a second feeding system (33, 34, 35) for supplying a sealing strip (32) such that
a first segment of the sealing strip is provided at a first triple point section (fig. 7), at which the longitudinal sealing joint and the first traverse sealing joint will intersect (fig. 1; where bottom 14 and 13 intersect; cross section seen in fig. 7), so that the first segment seals the first triple point section upon the heat sealing of the tube at the second heat sealing section to form the first traverse sealing joint,
a second segment of the sealing strip is provided at a second triple point section (fig. 7), at which the longitudinal sealing joint and the second traverse sealing joint will intersect (fig. 1; where top 14 and 13 intersect; cross section seen in fig. 7), so that the second segment seals the second triple point section upon the heat sealing of the tube at the third heat sealing section to form the second traverse sealing joint,
wherein each of the first segment and the second segment of the heat-sealable sealing strip (32) is provided away from the overlapping section (figs. 5 and 7; 32 moves away from the overlap of 19 and 20) in only one direction (see fig. 7; #32 moves away from the overlapping section of 19 and 20 in only a rightward direction in a comparable manner to that of the Applicant’s invention).
Wherein the Applicant has argued that Cheeley does not disclose the heat-sealable sealing strip is provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction the Office further points to Reil.
However, Reil teaches a packaging being made of a flat sheet (12) and comprising an overlapping section (where 4 and 5 overlap), at which the two opposite side edge sections (4, 5) overlap each other when the flat sheet is folded to form the flat sheet into a tube (fig. 8) and wherein the heat-sealable (col. 4 lines 29-46) sealing strip (7) is provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction (figs. 8 and 10; col. 6 lines 18-20 and 25-30, 50-52; col. 7 lines 33-37).
Given the teachings of Reil, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Cheeley to have the the heat-sealable sealing strip provided away from the overlapping section in only one direction as in Reil. Reil teaches a similar invention of a pack whereby it uses a sealing strip along a longitudinal seam as is similar to Cheeley. In Reil the sealing strip is sealed such that it runs away from the overlap in one direction so that a user may more easily open the pack at a later time which may be a desired feature for easier access to the contents.
Regarding claim 16, Cheeley discloses wherein the sealing strip (32) is provided along the entire length of the overlapping section (figs. 2 and 5-7).
Claim(s) 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheeley (US Patent 3,314,591) in view of Reil (US Patent 4,721,242) in view of Miyamoto (US Patent 8,713,902 B2).
Regarding claim 15, Cheeley discloses wherein the second feeding system (33, 34, 35) is configured to supply (col. 3 lines 21-48; fig. 2) at least part of the sealing strip (32),
the second feeding system comprises a film reel (33) feeding system (34, 35) for providing and arranging the sealing strip at the folding section between the two side edge sections and at the overlapping section (col. 3 lines 21-48; figs. 2 and 4-7),
the first feeding system (17, 23) comprises a sheet reel (17) feeding system (23) for unrolling (col. 2 lines 48-61) a longitudinal flat sheet material from a sheet reel to supply the flat sheet (16),
the second heat sealing section and the third heat sealing section are integral or identical (37 and/or 38), and
wherein the first heat sealing section (31) comprises a movable sealing part, which is configured to cooperate with a counterpart (18).
Wherein the Applicant may argue that the heat sealing section of Cheeley is not explicitly disclosed as being moving, the Office further points to Miyamoto which teaches wherein the first heat sealing section (16, 31; figs. 4-5) comprises a movable sealing part (16a; col. 5 lines 29-62), which is configured to cooperate with a counterpart (31, 13b).
Given the teachings of Miyamoto, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify the vertical heat sealing section of Cheeley with the vertical heat sealing section of Miyamoto. Doing so would allow for a user to control the amount of heat and duration of heat application to the film at a desired degree and time to better fit the film material.
Regarding claim 17, Cheeley as modified by Miyamoto teaches wherein the movable sealing part (Miyamoto – 16a), which is configured to cooperate with a folding tube (Miyamoto – 31, 13b), or of the filling section (Miyamoto – 31, 13b) in order to form the longitudinal sealing joint (Miyamoto – col. 5 lines 29-62; figs. 4-5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 18 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments are deemed directed toward limitations (“only one direction”) which are deemed to constitute new matter as detailed above.
Insofar as the amendments are argued to overcome Cheeley, the Office is also further not persuaded. While the Applicant points to fig. 6 of Cheeley as showing the strip provided away in “both directions” (i.e. not only one direction), the Office notes that the position claimed is that of the “triple point section”. Figure 7 of Cheeley is deemed to be comparable to the claimed first and second segment “triple point section”. Figure 7 of Cheeley is deemed to show the heat-sealable strip moving away in only one direction.
Insofar as the Applicant may further contend that the disclosure of fig. 7 of Cheeley does not read on the new limitations, the Office has further pointed to Reil which is also deemed teach the new limitations as detailed 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 ANDREW M TECCO whose telephone number is (571)270-3694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11a-7p.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at (571) 270-1926. 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.
/ANDREW M TECCO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights