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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 16/496174, filed on 09/20/2019.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/28/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 5, 9, 10, 16, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 4, the limitation reciting “a first set of perforation” appears to contain a typographical error that should read --a first set of perforations--.
Regarding claim 5, it is suggested to amend the limitation reciting “formed on the lateral side attachment portions” to --formed on the first and second lateral side attachment portions-- in order to use consistent terminology throughout the claims.
Regarding claims 9, 10, 16, and 17, the limitations reciting “the first and second set of perforations” appear to contain a typographical error that should read --the first and second sets of perforations--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-22 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.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation reciting “wherein an attachment position guide…comprises one or more cutting portions and folding guides” is indefinite because it is not clear whether the recitation of “one or more cutting portions and folding guides” is intended to require that the attachment position guide comprises:
(a) one or more (i.e., at least one) selected from the group consisting of cutting portions and folding guides;
(b) one or more cutting portions and one or more folding guides; or
(c) one or more cutting portions and a plurality of folding guides.
In looking to the instant specification at paragraph [0159], in reference to Fig. 49 which corresponds to the embodiment claimed in claim 1, the release paper (10000) is said to include an attachment position guide (11110) that helps guide either of the front or rear side of the cigarette pack to align with the rear surface of the cigarette pack sticker. The attachment position guide includes a first cutting portion (11111), which splits the release paper into left and right segments, and a pair of folding guides (11113), which are positioned along the left and right ends of the attachment position guide, respectively. In all embodiments of the present invention, the attachment position guide includes either a pair of cutting portions (e.g., see Figs. 4A, 41), or at least one cutting portion and at least one pair of folding guides (e.g., see Figs. 2A, 49, 51). In particular, it appears to be essential to the present invention that the folding guides, when present, are present in pairs.
Absent further clarification from the Applicant, for the purpose of applying prior art, the claim will be interpreted as being satisfied when the attachment position guide comprises one or more cutting portions and one or more folding guides.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation reciting “one or more folding guides positioned along the boundaries between the cover portions and the attachment portions” is indefinite because it is not clear whether the claim is intended to require (1) that the one or more folding guides are positioned along the boundaries between each of the cover portions (i.e., the first cover portion and second cover portion) and the attachment portions (i.e., the first lateral side attachment portion, the second lateral side attachment portion, the top-side attachment portion, and the bottom-side attachment portion), or (2) that one or more of the folding guides are positioned along one or more of the boundaries between the cover portions and the attachment portions.
In looking to paragraphs [0159] and [0162], in reference to Figs. 48, 49, and 51, the folding guides (11113, 12113, 12114) are said to be positioned along the boundaries between the front or rear cover portion and its neighboring lateral-side, top-side, or bottom-side attachment portions of the release paper. Based on the configurations shown in Figs. 49 and 51, it is understood that the folding guides are not formed along every boundary between the cover portions and the attachment portions. Therefore, for the purpose of applying prior art, the claim will be interpreted as requiring that one or more of the folding guides are positioned along one or more of the boundaries between the cover portions and the attachment portions.
It is further noted that the folding guides are positioned on the release paper, whereas the cover portions and the attachment portions are parts of the cigarette pack sticker. The folding guides being positioned along the boundaries between cover portions and attachment portions is therefore interpreted to mean that the folding guides are formed on a position of the release paper corresponding to the boundaries between cover portions and attachment portions.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation reciting “the second cover portion is configured to…attach to the opposite side of the cigarette pack” is indefinite because the phrase “the opposite side of the cigarette pack” lacks proper antecedent basis in the claims. Given that the claim requires that the first cover portion is configured to be attached to a front or rear side of the cigarette pack, the limitation requiring that the second cover portion is configured to be attached to “the opposite side” of the cigarette pack appears to intend to require that the second cover portion is configured to be attached to the side of the cigarette pack opposite the front or rear side to which the first cover portion is attached. Absent further clarification, the claim will be interpreted as such for the purpose of applying prior art.
Regarding claims 3 and 6, the limitations directed to the portions of the sticker being “configured to” extend from adjacent portions and to attach to certain sides of the cigarette pack are indefinite. Although it is understood that the portions of the sticker are configured to attach to certain sides of the cigarette pack, it is not clear what is meant by certain portions being “configured to” extend from adjacent portions of the sticker. It appears as if the claim intends to require that each portion of the sticker extends from an adjacent portion and is configured to attach to a corresponding side of the cigarette pack. For the purposes of applying prior art, the limitations of claim 3 will be interpreted as follows:
--the first lateral side attachment portion extends from the first cover portion and is configured to attach to one lateral side of the cigarette pack--
--the second cover portion extends from the first lateral side attachment portion and is configured to attach to the opposite side of the cigarette pack--
--the second lateral side attachment portion extends from the second cover portion and is configured to attach to the other lateral side of the cigarette pack--
--the top-side attachment portion extends from the upper section of the first or second cover portion and is configured to attach to a top side of the cigarette pack--
–the bottom-side attachment portion extends from the lower second of the first or second cover portion and is configured to attach to a bottom side of the cigarette pack--.
Likewise, the limitations in claim 6 will be interpreted as follows:
--a first auxiliary cover which extends from the second lateral side attachment portion and is configured to attach to the surface of the cigarette pack where the first cover portion will be attached during application of the sticker--
--a second auxiliary cover which extends from the top-side attachment portion and is configured to attach to the same surface as the first auxiliary cover--
--a third auxiliary cover which extends from the bottom-side attachment portion and is configured to attach to the same surface as the first and second auxiliary covers--
--a pair of fourth auxiliary covers which extend from the upper sections of both the first and second lateral side attachment portions and are configured to attach to the top surface of the cigarette pack--
--a pair of fifth auxiliary covers which extend from the lower sections of both the first and second lateral side attachment portions and are configured to attach to the bottom surface of the cigarette pack--.
Regarding claims 9 and 16, the limitation reciting “the first and second set of perforations are arranged as continuous lines” is indefinite because it is not clear how perforations can be formed as continuous lines.
In particular, the common definition of the term “perforation” is a hole or a line of small holes punched or bored through something (see https://www.thefreedictionary.com/perforation). The claimed set of perforations therefore is understood to refer to a set of holes formed through the sticker member. However, in looking to the instant specification at paragraph [0140], the perforations are said to be provided as a plurality of continuous lines, as shown in Fig. 39, or alternatively as discontinuous lines spaced at regular intervals to facilitate tearing. The discontinuous lines spaced at regular intervals fall within the conventional meaning of the term “perforations”, however, the continuous lines shown in Fig. 39 appear to correspond to score lines rather than to perforations. Absent further clarification, for the purpose of applying prior art the term “set of perforations” will be interpreted in light of the specification to encompass both continuous score lines (as required by claims 9 and 16) and discontinuous holes or slits spaced apart at regular intervals (as required by claims 10 and 17).
Regarding claim 15, the limitations reciting “the upper segment of the release paper corresponds to a region covering at least the top-side attachment portion, the second auxiliary cover, and upper remaining part of the first or second cover portion not covered by the left or right segment” and “the lower segment of the release paper corresponds to a region covering at least the bottom-side attachment portion, the third auxiliary cover, and lower remaining part of the first or second cover portion not covered by the left or right segment” are indefinite in combination with the limitations of claims 1 and 7.
In particular, claim 1 requires that the attachment position guide is formed on a position of the release paper corresponding to the first or second cover portion of the sticker. Claim 7 further requires that a pair of second cutting portions is formed at the upper and lower ends of the attachment position guide and is configured to split the release paper into upper and lower segments. Given that the second cutting portions are formed at the upper and lower ends of the attachment position guide (i.e., along the upper and lower ends of the first or second cover portion, at the boundary between the first or second cover portion and the top-side and bottom-side attachment portions), it is not clear how the upper and lower segments of the release paper can include an upper or lower remaining part of the first or second cover portion. Rather, as shown in Fig. 49, the entirety of the first or second cover portion is covered by the left and right segments due to the positioning of the first and second cutting portions.
In looking to paragraph [0162] of the specification, the upper and lower segments of the release paper are said to be depicted in Fig. 51 as corresponding to the regions of the release paper as claimed in claim 15. However, the embodiment of claim 7, from which claim 15 depends, corresponds to the embodiment shown in Fig. 49 rather than that shown in Fig. 51. Claim 15 therefore appears to intend to depend from claim 8, however, claim 22 would be a substantial duplicate thereof.
Regarding claim 21, the limitations reciting “the left segment of the release paper corresponds to a region covering at least a left half of the first or second cover portion…” and “the right segment of the release paper corresponds to a region covering a right half of the first or second cover portion…” are indefinite in combination with the limitations of claims 1 and 8. Similar to the issues presented above with respect to claim 15, the limitation of claim 21 appears to correspond with the embodiment of claim 7 rather than the embodiment of claim 8.
In particular, it is not clear how the left or right segment can be considered to cover the left or right half, respectively, of the first or second cover portion when a pair of angular U-shaped second cutting portions are formed at the upper and lower ends of the first cutting portion as recited in claim 8. As shown in Fig. 51, the left and right segments formed by the first and second cutting portions each have a shape that covers only part of the left and right sides of the first or second cover portion. The left and right segments formed by the configuration set forth in claim 8 therefore do not cover the left or right halves of the first or second cover portion, as required by claim 21.
Regarding claims 4, 5, 7, 8, 10-14, 17-20, and 22, the claims are rejected based on their dependency on claim 1.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Flynn (US 2008/0141568, cited on IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Flynn teaches a label assembly (20; sticker member) comprising a face sheet (30) and a back sheet (60; release paper) removably adhered to the face sheet ([0022], Figs. 2-3). Tearable lines of separation (45) are formed in the face sheet to define one or more individual labels (50; sticker), and the surface of the face sheet disposed toward the back sheet has an adhesive coating (adhesive layer) formed thereon ([0023], [0028], Fig. 2).
As shown in annotated Fig. 2 below, the label (50) includes a first cover portion, a second cover portion, a first lateral side attachment portion, a second lateral side attachment portion, a top-side attachment portion, and a bottom-side attachment portion. The back sheet (60; release paper) further comprises tearable lines of separation (45; cutting portions) and index lines (70; folding guides) for aligning a box blank (15) relative to the label (50) ([0031]-[0032], Figs. 3-5).
PNG
media_image1.png
634
886
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to the limitations reciting “for a cigarette pack” and “configured to cover the entire surface of a cigarette pack”, it is noted that these limitations are considered functional language related to an intended use of the claimed sticker. Flynn teaches a label which is applied to a box to cover the entire surface of the box and is therefore capable of performing in the manner claimed, thus satisfying the claimed functional limitation.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haile (DE 10354488, cited on IDS, machine translation via EPO provided) in view of Flynn (US 2008/0141568, cited on IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Haile teaches a covering means (A; sticker member) comprising a sticker (1; cigarette pack sticker) applied to a carrier material (T; release paper), wherein the sticker can be peeled from the carrier material by a user and stuck onto a product ([0005], [0020], Fig. 1). The sticker is understood to include an adhesive layer applied to a rear side, covered by the carrier material, so that the sticker can be stuck onto a product. Haile teaches that products which can be externally designed by a user using the covering means include cigarette boxes [0013].
Haile further teaches that the sticker can be designed in such a way that the user can completely or partially cover the product, i.e., by covering the side surfaces and the bottom and/or top of the product ([0007], [0010]). The covering means may include a front surface (2; first cover portion), a rear surface (3; second cover portion), a first side surface (4), a second side surface (5; first lateral side attachment portion), an additional side surface (4a; second lateral side attachment portion), an additional surface (8; top-side attachment portion) to be used as a cover or base, and further surfaces (9, 10; bottom-side attachment portion) ([0020], Figs. 1-5).
Haile differs from the clamed invention in that the reference does not expressly teach that an attachment position guide comprising one or more cutting portions and one or more folding guides is formed on a position of the release paper corresponding to the first or second cover portion of the sticker.
However, in the analogous art of decorative labels for wrapping boxes, Flynn teaches a label assembly (20; sticker member) comprising a label (50; sticker) having a printable surface (52), an adhesive surface (adhesive layer), and a back sheet (60; release paper) removably adhered to the face sheet (Abstract, [0022]-[0024]). The back sheet comprises lines of separation (45; cutting portion) formed as a line of weakness or a die cut line, and further comprises at least one pair of index lines (70; folding guides) for aligning a box (15) relative to the label assembly ([0029], [0031]-[0032]). The lines of separation and index lines together correspond to the claimed attachment position guide. As shown in Figs. 3-5 of Flynn, the lines of separation and the index lines are formed on a position of the back sheet corresponding to a first or second cover portion of the label which is used to cover the front or back surface of the box.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the covering means of Haile by forming an attachment position guide comprising lines of separation and index lines on a position of the carrier material corresponding to the front or rear surface (2, 3; first or second cover portion) of the sticker, as taught by Flynn, in order to facilitate easier alignment of the front or rear surface of the sticker relative to the corresponding portion of a cigarette box.
Claims 2-10, 12-17, and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haile (DE 10354488, cited on IDS, machine translation via EPO provided) in view of Flynn (US 2008/0141568, cited on IDS) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Muto (JP 2014-233916, cited on IDS, machine translation provided).
Regarding claim 2, Haile in view of Flynn teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. As noted above, Flynn teaches that the back sheet (60; release paper) comprises lines of separation (45; cutting portion) formed as a line of weakness or a die cut line, wherein the lines of separation divide the release paper into removable portions (65, 60, 90; multiple segments) ([0031], [0033], Fig. 3).
As shown in Figs. 3-5, the index lines (70; folding guides) are positioned on the release sheet along the boundaries between the first or second cover portion, which corresponds to the bottom (17) of the box, and the first, second, top-side, and bottom-side attachment portions, which correspond to the sidewalls (19) of the box [0021].
Flynn teaches that the index lines are preferably inked or otherwise marked into the back sheet so as to be readily legible and apparent to a user [0037]. Flynn differs from the claimed invention in that the reference does not expressly teach that the index lines are perforated or pre-scored to facilitate easy folding of the divided segments of the release paper during application of the sticker.
However, in the analogous art of adhesive articles configured for alignment with target objects, Muto teaches a bookbinding tape including a printed layer (14) having a mark image (14A) which, similar to the index lines of Flynn, facilitate alignment when attaching a document to the tape ([0014], [0030]). Muto further teaches that the mark image can be provided as either a printed mark or a perforation for each representative paper size so that the tape can be aligned to documents of varying dimensions ([0035]-[0036]).
Given that Flynn teaches that the index lines can be inked or otherwise marked, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the index lines as perforations, based on the art-recognized suitability of such perforations for use as alignment markings, as taught by Muto. It is noted that the limitation reciting “to facilitate easy folding of the divided segments of the release paper during application of the sticker” is considered functional language related to the intended use of the perforated folding guides. Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches a sticker member comprising a release paper with perforated folding guides which are capable of performing in the manner claimed, thus the prior art satisfies the claimed functional limitation.
Regarding claim 3, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claim 2 above. As noted above, Haile teaches that the sticker (1) may include a front surface (2; first cover portion), a rear surface (3; second cover portion), a first side surface (4), a second side surface (5; first lateral side attachment portion), an additional side surface (4a; second lateral side attachment portion), an additional surface (8; top-side attachment portion) to be used as a cover or base, and further surfaces (9, 10) ([0020], Figs. 1-5).
PNG
media_image2.png
504
686
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As shown in annotated Fig. 3 above, the second side surface (5) extends from the front surface (2); the rear surface (3) extends from the second side surface (5); the additional side surface (4a) extends from the rear surface; and the additional surface (8) extends from the upper surface of the rear surface (3). As shown in the embodiment of Fig. 5, the sticker includes a surface (10) that could be used to attach to the bottom side of a cigarette pack.
Although the embodiment of Fig. 3 only illustrates one additional surface (8; top-side attachment portion) extending from the upper section of the rear surface, Haile teaches that the covering means can be used to completely cover the side surfaces and the top and bottom of the cigarette box [0010]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that in order for the sticker to be capable of covering the bottom of the cigarette box, the sticker would include a second additional surface (bottom-side attachment portion) identical to the additional surface (8), extending from the lower section of either the front surface or the rear surface (2, 3).
With respect to the limitations directed to the cover portions and attachment portions being configured to attach to certain sides of the cigarette pack, it is noted that these limitations are considered functional limitations directed to the intended use of the sticker member. The sticker taught by Haile comprises cover portions and attachment portions which have the claimed structure and are capable of performing in the manner claimed, thus satisfying the claimed functional limitations.
Regarding claim 4, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claim 3 above, and Haile further teaches that the sticker can be pre-perforated, as indicated by the lines (6; first set of perforations), in order to make it easier for the user to fold or detach parts of the sticker [0020]. As shown in Figs. 2, 4, and 5, the lines (6) are formed on the front surface (2; first cover portion), the second side surface (5; first lateral side attachment portion), and the additional side surface (4a; second lateral side attachment portion) in a configuration that corresponds to the cutting lines of a cigarette pack to which the sticker can be attached.
Regarding clam 5, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claim 4 above. Although Haile teaches that the sticker can be pre-perforated with lines (6) in order to make it easier for a user to fold or separate the sticker ([0024], Figs. 2, 4, 5), the reference does not teach that a second set of perforations is formed on the second cover portion, the first lateral side attachment portion, and the second lateral side attachment portion as claimed.
It would, however, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a second set of perforations extending through the second cover portion and the first and second lateral side attachment portions in order to facilitate separation of top and bottom sections of the sticker around the entire outer circumference of a cigarette pack to which the sticker may be applied. For example, the sticker can be configured to be attached to either a flip-top cigarette pack with a hinged lid or to a cigarette pack designed to open along a straight line extending around the circumference of the pack. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to form two sets of perforations as claimed in order to enable the sticker to be applied to different types of cigarette packs having different opening structures. In the case where the first perforations are formed diagonally in the first and second lateral side attachment portions, as shown in Figs. 2, 4, and 5 of Haile, and the second perforations are formed horizontally in the lateral side attachment portions, the first and second sets of perforations are configured to intersect with one another in the first and second lateral side attachment portions.
Regarding claim 6, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claim 5 above. Haile teaches that if the sticker is intended to cover the cigarette pack completely, the sticker may be provided with an additional side surface (4a) which can cover the side surface (4) ([0020], Figs. 1-5). Although Haile indicates that additional parts of the sticker may be included in order to provide more complete coverage of the sticker on the package, the reference does not expressly teach that the sticker includes a first, second, or third auxiliary cover or a pair of fourth or fifth auxiliary covers as claimed.
It would, however, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a first auxiliary cover extending from the additional side surface (4a; second lateral side attachment portion), a second auxiliary cover extending from the additional surface (8; top-side attachment portion), a third auxiliary cover extending from the other additional surface (8; bottom-side attachment portion), and a pair of fourth and fifth auxiliary covers extending from the upper and lower sections of the second and additional side surfaces (5, 4a; first and second lateral side attachment portions). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to add these auxiliary covers in order to enable the sticker to completely cover a cigarette pack, ensuring no areas are left uncovered, consistent with the teachings of Haile.
With respect to the limitations directed to the auxiliary covers being configured to attach to certain sides of the cigarette pack, it is noted that these limitations are considered functional limitations directed to the intended use of the sticker member. The auxiliary covers included in the sticker taught by Haile as detailed above would be capable of performing in the manner claimed, thus satisfying the claimed functional limitations.
Regarding claim 7, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claim 6 above. As noted above, Flynn teaches that the back sheet (release paper) includes lines of separation (45; first cutting portion) which separate the back sheet into removable portions (65, 80, 90), wherein the first removable portion (65) is separable from the label assembly and removable to expose an adhesive surface of the label ([0031], Fig. 3). Following removal of the first removable portion, at least one edge of the box (15) can be aligned with one or more index lines (70; folding guides) without unintentionally adhering the label to the box bottom (17) ([0032], [0034], Figs. 3-5).
As shown in Fig. 3 of Flynn, the lines of separation are formed in a vertical orientation at the center of the attachment position guide and are configured to split the back sheet into left and right segments, while the index lines include a pair of index lines formed in a vertical orientation (i.e., parallel to the lines of separation) located at the left and right ends of the attachment position guide. Haile in view of Flynn and Muto differs from the claimed invention in that the combination of references does not expressly teach a pair of second cutting portions formed in a horizontal orientation at the upper and lower ends of the attachment position guide as claimed.
It would, however, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a pair of second cutting portions formed in a horizontal orientation at upper and lower ends of the attachment position guide (e.g., aligned with the horizontal index lines), in order to enable only the portion of the adhesive corresponding to a first surface of the cigarette box to be exposed upon selective removal of the portion of the release paper located in the attachment position guide. For example, in the case where the back surface (3) of the sticker taught by Haile is intended to be adhered to the rear side of a cigarette pack (similar to the box bottom (17) in Flynn), forming a second cutting portion along the boundary between the back surface (3; second cover portion) and the additional surfaces (8; top- and bottom-side attachment portions) would allow for the adhesive to be exposed only in the back surface (3) of the sticker, while the additional surfaces (8) remain covered by the release paper. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include a pair of second cutting portions as claimed in order to enable a desired surface of the sticker to be aligned with the corresponding surface of the cigarette box without unintentionally adhering other surfaces of the sticker to the box, consistent with the teachings of Flynn. By including a pair of second cutting portions as claimed, the release paper would be split into upper and lower segments.
Regarding claim 8, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claim 6 above. As noted above, Flynn teaches that the back sheet (release paper) includes lines of separation (45; first cutting portion) which separate the back sheet into removable portions (65, 80, 90), wherein the first removable portion (65) is separable from the label assembly and removable to expose an adhesive surface of the label ([0031], Fig. 3). Following removal of the first removable portion, at least one edge of the box (15) can be aligned with one or more index lines (70; folding guides) without unintentionally adhering the label to the box bottom (17) ([0032], [0034], Figs. 3-5).
As shown in Fig. 3 of Flynn, the lines of separation are formed in a vertical orientation at the center of the attachment position guide and are configured to split the back sheet into left and right segments, while the index lines include a pair of first index lines formed in a vertical orientation (i.e., parallel to the lines of separation) located at the left and right ends of the attachment position guide and a pair of second index lines formed in a horizontal orientation located at upper and lower ends of the attachment position guide. Haile in view of Flynn and Muto differs from the claimed invention in that the combination of references does not expressly teach a pair of angular U-shaped second cutting portions arranged in a horizontal orientation at the upper and lower ends of the first cutting portion as claimed. However, Flynn does further teach that the first removable portion (65) preferably has a width smaller than a width of the box bottom so that the box can be aligned with the label along index lines (70) without unintentionally adhering portions of the box bottom to the label [0034].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a pair of angular U-shaped second cutting portions formed in a horizontal orientation at upper and lower ends of the lines of separation (e.g., located between the pair of horizontal index lines such that the width and length of the exposed adhesive area is smaller than the width and length of the box bottom), in order to enable only the portion of the adhesive corresponding to a first surface of the cigarette box to be exposed upon selective removal of the portion of the release paper located in the attachment position guide. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include a pair of second cutting portions as claimed in order to enable a desired surface of the sticker to be aligned with the corresponding surface of the cigarette box without unintentionally adhering other surfaces of the sticker to the box, consistent with the teachings of Flynn. By including a pair of second cutting portions as claimed, the release paper would be split into upper and lower segments.
Regarding claims 9, 10, 16, and 17, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claims 7 and 8 above. As noted above, Haile teaches that the sticker can be pre-perforated or pre-punched, as indicated by lines (6) shown in Figs. 2, 4, and 5, in order to make it easier for a user to fold or detach parts of the sticker [0020]. The lines shown in the figures of Haile correspond to the claimed set of perforations in the form of discontinuous lines spaced apart at regular intervals.
Although Haile does not expressly teach forming the pre-perforated or pre-punched lines as continuous lines, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the perforated lines as continuous score lines in order to facilitate folding or detaching parts of the sticker along the score lines, consistent with the teachings of Haile.
Regarding claims 12 and 19, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claims 7 and 8 above. As shown in Fig. 3 of Flynn, the index lines (70; folding guides) are all linear in shape.
Regarding claims 13 and 20, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claims 7 and 8 above, and Haile further teaches that the areas (2, 3; first and second cover portions) can be provided with advertising graphics or other information ([0004], [0023]).
Regarding claims 14, 15, 21, and 22, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claims 7 and 8 above. When the first and second cutting portions are formed on a portion of the release paper corresponding to the front or rear surface (2, 3; first or second cover portion) of the sticker taught by Haile, as detailed above, the left, right, upper, and lower segments of the release paper necessarily correspond to regions covering the claimed portions of the sticker.
Claims 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haile (DE 10354488, cited on IDS, machine translation via EPO provided) in view of Flynn (US 2008/0141568, cited on IDS) and Muto (JP 2014-233916, cited on IDS, machine translation provided) as applied to claims 7 and 8 above, and further in view of Kunz (DE 102013110862, machine translation via EPO provided).
Regarding claims 11 and 18, Haile in view of Flynn and Muto teaches all of the limitations of claims 7 and 8 above, but the combination of references does not expressly teach that an adhesive-free region is formed on the rear surface of the sticker as claimed.
However, in the analogous art of adhesive labels, Kunz teaches a label (1) detachably held by an adhesive layer (7) on a sheet or web (8; release paper) made of silicone paper, wherein the adhesive layer has a corner area (14; adhesive-free region) in which the adhesive is left out ([0039], [0041], Fig. 3). The corner area of the label serves as a grip tab, which can be easily bent up and grasped for peeling the label [0012]. The adhesive-free corner area is therefore capable of facilitating easy removal of the release paper.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sticker member of Haile in view of Flynn and Muto by forming an adhesive-free region on the rear surface of the sticker, as taught by Kunz, in order to enable a portion of the sticker to be easily grasped for the purpose of peeling the sticker.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Merrill (US 2016/0016710) teaches a multilayer web (200) comprising a top layer (206; sticker), a layer of adhesive (208), and a backing sheet (210; release paper) covering the adhesive ([0052], Figs. 2A-2C). The backing sheet consists of a plurality of small individual pieces of backing sheet separated by small gaps (214; cutting portion), wherein a series of horizontal and vertical lines (218, 220; folding guides) may be formed on the backing pieces for use in aligning an item to be wrapped ([0054], [0057], Figs. 3, 6A-6E).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REBECCA L GRUSBY whose telephone number is (571) 272-1564. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM-5:30 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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at (571) 272-1291. 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.
/Rebecca L Grusby/Examiner, Art Unit 1785