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 .
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 9-12, 15, and 20 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 9 recites the limitation "the product container" in line 3 of claim 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the at least one micro cut" in lines 2-3 of claim 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the pouch-like container" in line 4 of claim 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the at least one micro cut" in lines 2-3 of claim 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 8,087,827 B2 to Mir (“Mir”) in view of French Publication 2,852,931 to Breger (“Breger”).
As to claim 1, Mir teaches a product package filter assembly, comprising: a support element, wherein the support element is defined by: a support element body (first base film 805); a support element perimeter (perimeter of the first base film 805); and at least one support element aperture (micro-perforations 820) disposed in the support element body (Mir Fig. 13 shows the micro-perforations 820 on the first base film 805); a surface film element, wherein the surface film element is defined by: a surface film element body (second base film 810); at least one cut (micro-perforations 825) disposed in the surface film element body that extends through the surface film element body (Mir Fig. 13 shows the micro-perforations 825 that extend through the second base film 810) to define at least one surface film element aperture (Mir Fig. 13 shows an aperture at the end of the film 810 farthest from the adhesive strip 815); and a surface film element perimeter (perimeter of the second base film 810); and a sealing means (adhesive strip 815), and wherein at least the support element perimeter and the surface film element perimeter are sealably joined together using the sealing means to form an airtight barrier between the support element perimeter and the surface film element perimeter (Mir, col. 20, lines 59-61).
Mir does not teach a filter element, wherein the filter element is defined by: a filter element body; and a filter element perimeter; wherein the support element, the filter element, and the surface film element are arranged in a layer with the filter element disposed between the support element and the surface film element.
Breger teaches a filter element, wherein the filter element is defined by: a filter element body (filter 36); and a filter element perimeter (the perimeter of the filter 36); wherein the support element (layer 29), the filter element (filter 36), and the surface film (film 26) element are arranged in a layer with the filter element disposed between the support element and the surface film element (Breger Fig. 8 shows the filter 36 in between the film 26 and the layer 29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the filter of Breger in between the support element and the surface film as taught by Mir to filter the steam being released from the product package.
As to claim 2, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of wherein the at least one cut is one of a plurality of cuts disposed in the surface film element body to define a plurality of surface film element apertures (Mir Fig. 13 shows the plurality of micro-perforations).
As to claim 3, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 2, wherein in response to heating a product residing in an interior of a product container that is sealably joined to the product package filter assembly, a gas is generated that increases an interior pressure within the interior of the product container so that the interior pressure becomes greater than an ambient pressure, wherein the generated gas vents out through the plurality of surface film element apertures of the product package filter assembly, and wherein the filter element prevents ambient particles from entering into the interior of the product package (Mir, col. 19, lines 14-17).
As to claim 4, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 3, wherein after completion of the heating of the product, the interior of the product package cools such that the interior pressure becomes less than an ambient pressure, and wherein the filter element prevents ambient particles from entering into the interior of the product package as ambient air enters into the interior of the product package as the product package cools (Breger Fig. 8 shows filter 36 capable of preventing ambient particles from entering into an interior of bag 1).
As to claim 5, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 1, wherein the support element perimeter, the filter element perimeter, and the surface film element perimeter are sealably joined together using the sealing means (Mir, col. 19, lines 10-12).
As to claim 6, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 5, wherein in response to heating a product residing in an interior of a product container that is sealably joined to the product package filter assembly, a gas is generated that increases an interior pressure within the interior of the product container so that the interior pressure becomes greater than an ambient pressure, wherein the gas vents out of the product container into an ambient region around the product container firstly via the at least one support element aperture disposed in the support element body, secondly via the filter element body, and thirdly via the at least one surface film element aperture disposed in the surface film element body (Mir, col. 19, liens 14-17).
As to claim 13, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 1, wherein the sealing means is a first sealing means, wherein the support element is defined by a first side portion and a second side portion, wherein the at least one support element aperture is disposed in the first side portion, and wherein a fold line separates the first side portion and the second side portion, and further comprising: a second sealing means, wherein the second sealing means sealably joins a first perimeter edge of the first side portion with a second perimeter edge of the second side portion, wherein the first side portion and the second side portion cooperatively define a pouch-like container (Mir, col. 7, lines 1-6).
As to claim 14, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 13, further comprising: a third sealing means, wherein the third sealing means sealably joins a first end of the product package filter assembly; and a fourth sealing means, wherein the fourth sealing means sealably joins a second end of the product package filter assembly, and wherein the second end of the product package filter assembly is opposing the first end of the product package filter assembly (Mir Fig. 2 shows the packaging device in a pouch like container).
As to claim 15, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 14, wherein after the third sealing means sealably joins the first end of the product package filter assembly and before the fourth sealing means sealably joins the second end of the product package filter assembly, a product is inserted into an interior of the pouch-like container (Mir Fig. 2 shows the packaging device in a pouch like container).
As to claim 16, Mir modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 1, wherein the support element aperture is one of a plurality of support element apertures disposed in the support element, wherein between each adjacent support element aperture is a support member, but does not teach wherein the support member and a corresponding lower surface of the surface film element frictionally retain the filter element.
Berger teaches wherein the support member and a corresponding lower surface of the surface film element frictionally retain the filter element (Berger Fig. 8 shows a support member between a plurality of micro-perforations 11 in layer 29 and corresponding lower surface of base film 26 frictionally retaining filter 36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the filter of Breger in between the support element and the surface film as taught by Mir to filter the steam being released from the product package.
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over German Publication DE 10 2012 017 156 A1 to Erfinder (“Erfinder”) in view of Breger.
As to claim 17, Erfinder teaches a product package filter assembly, comprising: a surface film element, wherein the surface film element is defined by: a surface film element body (vapor permeable layer 4); at least one cut (holes 7) disposed in the surface film element body that extends through the surface film element body (Erfinder Fig. 4 shows the holes 7 extend through the layer 4) to define a support element aperture (Erfinder Fig. 4 shows an aperture at the end of layer 4 closest to the second layer); and a surface film element perimeter (Erfinder Fig. 5 shows the perimeter of the layer 4 attached to the supporting collar 12 with an adhesive 14); a sealing means (Erfinder Fig. 5 shows cover 13 is sealed together), wherein the surface film element perimeter is sealably joined to a bottom side of the surface film element using the sealing means to form an airtight barrier between the surface film element perimeter and the bottom side of the surface film element (Erfinder, pg. 6, lines 29-31).
Erfinder does not teach a filter element, wherein the filter element is defined by: a filter element body; and a filter element perimeter; and wherein the surface film element is disposed on top of the filter element.
Breger teaches a filter element, wherein the filter element is defined by: a filter element body (filter 36); and a filter element perimeter (the perimeter of the filter 36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the filter of Breger on top of the surface film as taught by Erfinder to filter the steam being released from the product package.
As to claim 18, Erfinder modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 17, wherein the sealing means is a first sealing means, wherein the airtight barrier is a first airtight barrier, and further comprising: a second sealing means (adhesive 14), wherein the second sealing means sealably joins the bottom surface of the surface film element to a surface of a product container so that a second airtight barrier is formed between at least the perimeter of the support element and the surface of the product container (Erfinder, pg. 6, lines 25-31).
As to claim 19, Erfinder modified by Breger teaches the product package filter assembly of claim 18, wherein the second sealing means is proximate to the surface film element perimeter (Erfinder Fig. 5 shows the adhesive film 14).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13, 13-14, 16, and 18-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,091,231. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both teach: A product package filter assembly, comprising: a support element, wherein the support element is defined by: a support element body; a support element perimeter; and at least one support element aperture disposed in the support element body; a filter element, wherein the filter element is defined by: a filter element body; and a filter element perimeter; a surface film element, wherein the surface film element is defined by: a surface film element body; at least one cut disposed in the surface film element body that extends through the surface film element body to define at least one surface film element aperture; and a surface film element perimeter; and a sealing means, wherein the support element, the filter element, and the surface film element are arranged in a layer with the filter element disposed between the support element and the surface film element, and wherein at least the support element perimeter and the surface film element perimeter are sealably joined together using the sealing means to form an airtight barrier between the support element perimeter and the surface film element perimeter.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-12 and 20 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
None of the prior art of record is seen to disclose or suggest the limitation of claim 7 that a second sealing means, wherein the second sealing means sealably joins a bottom surface of the support element to a surface of a product container so that a second airtight barrier is formed between at least the perimeter of the support element and the surface of the product container. For example, the closest reference found, Mir, teaches micro-perforations on the first base film but does not teach a second sealing means, wherein the second sealing means sealably joins a bottom surface of the support element to a surface of a product container so that a second airtight barrier is formed between at least the perimeter of the support element and the surface of the product container.
None of the prior art of record is seen to disclose or suggest the limitation of claim 10 that wherein the sealing means is a first sealing means, wherein the airtight barrier is a first airtight barrier, and wherein the at least one micro cut is one of a plurality of micro cuts disposed in the surface film element body, and further comprising: a moisture barrier film that is an impermeable moisture barrier and that is defined by a moisture barrier perimeter. For example, the closest reference found, Mir, teaches micro-perforations on the first base film but does not teach wherein the sealing means is a first sealing means, wherein the airtight barrier is a first airtight barrier, and wherein the at least one micro cut is one of a plurality of micro cuts disposed in the surface film element body, and further comprising: a moisture barrier film that is an impermeable moisture barrier and that is defined by a moisture barrier perimeter.
None of the prior art of record is seen to disclose or suggest the limitation of claim 20 that a moisture barrier film that is an impermeable moisture barrier and that is defined by a moisture barrier perimeter; and a second sealing means that sealably joins a top surface of the surface film element with a bottom surface of the moisture barrier proximate to the moisture barrier perimeter, wherein the second sealing means is at least partially releasable so that the moisture barrier film is at least partially removeable from the surface film element, and wherein a size of the moisture barrier film is large enough to cover the at least one surface film element aperture disposed in the surface film element. For example, the closest reference found, Mir, teaches micro-perforations on the first base film but does not teach a moisture barrier film that is an impermeable moisture barrier and that is defined by a moisture barrier perimeter; and a second sealing means that sealably joins a top surface of the surface film element with a bottom surface of the moisture barrier proximate to the moisture barrier perimeter, wherein the second sealing means is at least partially releasable so that the moisture barrier film is at least partially removeable from the surface film element, and wherein a size of the moisture barrier film is large enough to cover the at least one surface film element aperture disposed in the surface film element.
Conclusion
Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON LYNN POOS whose telephone number is (571)270-7427. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thus 10-3 EST.
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 Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
/M.L.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/JEFFREY R ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733