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 .
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention of claims 1-14 drawn to a sheet in the reply filed on 1/16/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/16/26. An action on the merits of claims 1-14 follows.
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 1-14 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 1 is indefinite because based on at least the requirements of at least dependent claims 4 and 5, the number of strips encompassed in claim 1 is not clear. The examiner notes that claim 1 includes requirements that the transparent and non-transparent strips alternate and each non-transparent strip has a width which is less than the width of each transparent strip. These requirements suggest that claim 1 encompasses at least a plurality of non-transparent strips and a plurality of transparent strips. On the other hand, at least claims 4 and 5 that are dependent on claim 1 appear to suggest that claim 1 encompasses only one of each type of strip. Corrections are required to claim 1 to make clear the number of each type of strip encompassed therein. In the comparison of claim 1 and the prior art below, claim 1 is interpreted as requiring a plurality of non-transparent strips and a plurality of transparent strips.
Claims 4-6 are indefinite because the numbers of strips apparently required therein is not clear. See the above commentary regarding the indefiniteness of claim 1.
Claim 7 is indefinite because it’s requirement that a width of one transparent strip be less than a width of a non-transparent strip is inconsistent with claim 1’s requirement that the width of each non-transparent strip be less than the width of each transparent strip. Claim 7 is so indefinite for this reason that it has not been further treated on its merits.
Claim 11 is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis for the phrase “said transparent base sheet” therein.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bradley (2011/0142377). As indicated above, the claims are interpreted for purposes of their comparison with the prior art as if claim 1 requires a plurality of non-transparent strips and a plurality of transparent strips. Thus, Bradley meets all of the elements of the noted claims in that Bradley discloses a sheet (the laminated sheet used as the bag material as disclosed in at least [0022] through [0044] and Fig 4) that has all of the features of the claimed sheet.
The transparent and non-transparent strips extending in a longitudinal direction of the sheet and having a width in a transverse direction of the sheet are the transparent window portions 24 and opaque portions 26 of the Bradley sheet. As can be appreciated from Figs 1-6 of Bradley the strips (portions 24 and 26) alternate in the transverse direction of the sheet as also required in claim 1. Finally, given disclosure such as that in at least [0026] of Bradley, each non-transparent strip can have a width that is less than the width of each transparent strip.
Regarding claim 4 and 5, the Bradley strips include the number of strips apparently claimed as best the claims are understood.
Regarding claim 11 the sheet forming the transparent strips in Bradley is made of a polymeric material as described in [0021] for example.
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) 2, 8-10 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bradley. Bradley may not disclose the features of these claims, however, the prior art of record shows that these features are either conventional or well within the level of skill of one of ordinary skill in the relevant art to provide. For example, regarding claim 2, one of ordinary skill in the relevant art has the skill to provide different strip widths, including a width difference of at most 10 mm, given the teaching in Bradley [0026] and given that it is conventional to make bags of different sizes. In another example, regarding claim 8, it is conventional to form a non-transparent portion of a bag wrapper having a transparent window therein by providing a non-transparent coating over a base sheet forming the transparent window. As one example only, this expedient is shown by Bjorkengren (in Bjorkengren a window is formed by leaving an area of plastic material uncovered or only somewhat covered by a heat conductive layer, depending on the degree of transparency required of the window). Regarding claim 9, one of ordinary skill in the art has the skill to make the non-transparent coatings of any color including white. Regarding claim 10 coatings of ink are conventional. Regarding claim 12, laminates of PE and PET that are transparent are also conventional in the relevant art. Regarding claim 14 one of ordinary skill in the art has the skill to select an appropriate haze for the Bradley wrapper depending on requirements such as the degree of transparency or opacity required of the various portions of the wrapper. The examiner notes that hazes appear to be standardized as indicated by the requirements of claim 14.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to provide the sheet of Bradley with the missing features for the purpose of better adapting the sheet to form bags having specific requirements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB K ACKUN whose telephone number is (571)272-4418. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 11am-7pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at (571) 270-5531. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/JACOB K ACKUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights