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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 9-13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Littlejohn et al. (US 2020/0399011 A1, hereinafter Littlejohn).
Regarding claim 1, Littlejohn teaches a molded fiber tray comprising:
a base (1110) (FIG. 2);
a sidewall (1120) extending from the base to form a content holding structure (FIG. 2);
an edge (1130) extending from the sidewall configured for holding the molded fiber tray (FIG. 2); and
a barrier layer (80 or 90, 60-paragraph 31 “one or more adhesive can be used between any of the layers 50, 60, 70, 80, 90…the waterproof layer 60 can serve as the binder or adhesive) formed on an internal surface of the base, the sidewall, and the edge, the barrier layer configured to be substantially chemically inert with respect to contents in the content holding structure (paragraphs 14-38 and FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 2, Littlejohn teaches the molded fiber tray of claim 1 above, wherein the tray further comprises another barrier layer (80 or 90, 60-paragraph 31 “one or more adhesive can be used between any of the layers 50, 60, 70, 80, 90…the waterproof layer 60 can serve as the binder or adhesive) formed on an external surface of the base, the sidewall, and the edge, the another barrier layer configured to substantially prevent moisture, condensation, or liquid from absorbing into the molded fiber tray (paragraphs 14-34).
Regarding claim 3, Littlejohn teaches the molded fiber tray of claim 1 above, wherein the barrier layer includes at least one of a vapor barrier, a moisture barrier, a grease barrier, a gas barrier, or an oil barrier (paragraph 16).
Regarding claim 4, Littlejohn teaches the molded fiber tray of claim 2 above, wherein the barrier layer and the another barrier layer includes at least one of a vapor barrier, a moisture barrier, a grease barrier, a gas barrier, or an oil barrier (paragraph 16).
Regarding claim 9, Littlejohn teaches the molded fiber tray of claim 1 above, wherein the molded fiber tray is comprised of at least one of sustainable materials, recyclable materials, biodegradable materials, bio-based resins, weight-optimized biodegradable plastic, molded fiber, molded paper, molded pulp, fiber, paper, pulp, paperboard, pressed pulp, fiber based, pressed fiber, paper, starch, cellulose, biodegradable resins such as Polylactic acid (PLA), Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), Polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB), Polyethylene Furanoate (PEF) (paragraph 14).
Regarding claim 10, Littlejohn teaches a method for making a molded fiber tray comprising:
forming a molded fiber tray from structure forming materials using a structure forming process (paragraphs 14, 32, 33, 35), wherein the molded fiber tray includes a base (1110) (FIG. 2), a sidewall (1120) extending from the base to form a content holding structure (FIG. 2), and an edge (1130) extending from the sidewall configured for holding the molded fiber tray (FIG. 2); and
forming a barrier layer (80 or 90, 60-paragraph 31 “one or more adhesive can be used between any of the layers 50, 60, 70, 80, 90…the waterproof layer 60 can serve as the binder or adhesive) on an internal surface of the base, the sidewall, and the edge, the barrier layer configured to be substantially chemically inert with respect to contents in the content holding structure (paragraphs 14-38 and FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 11, Littlejohn teaches the method of claim 10 above, wherein the method further comprises forming another barrier layer (80 or 90, 60-paragraph 31 “one or more adhesive can be used between any of the layers 50, 60, 70, 80, 90…the waterproof layer 60 can serve as the binder or adhesive) on an external surface of the base, the sidewall, and the edge, the another barrier layer configured to substantially prevent moisture, condensation, or liquid from absorbing into the molded fiber tray (paragraphs 14-34).
Regarding claim 12, Littlejohn teaches the method of claim 10 above, wherein the barrier layer includes at least one of a vapor barrier, a moisture barrier, a grease barrier, a gas barrier, or an oil barrier (paragraph 16).
Regarding claim 13, Littlejohn teaches the method of claim 11 above, wherein the barrier layer and the another barrier layer includes at least one of a vapor barrier, a moisture barrier, a grease barrier, a gas barrier, or an oil barrier (paragraph 16).
Regarding claim 17, Littlejohn teaches the method of claim 10 above, wherein the molded fiber tray is comprised of at least one of sustainable materials, recyclable materials, biodegradable materials, bio-based resins, weight-optimized biodegradable plastic, molded fiber, molded paper, molded pulp, fiber, paper, pulp, paperboard, pressed pulp, fiber based, pressed fiber, paper, starch, cellulose, biodegradable resins such as Polylactic acid (PLA), Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), Polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB), Polyethylene Furanoate (PEF) (paragraph 14).
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.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littlejohn, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Rynning (US 3,986,655 A).
Regarding claim 5, Littlejohn teaches the molded fiber tray of claim 1 above, but fails to teach the base including a geometric pattern. Rynning teaches an analogous molded tray and further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide the base with a geometric pattern in order to reinforce and stiffen the base (column 1 line 21-column 2 line 24 and Fig. 1).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Littlejohn by additionally providing the base with a geometric pattern, as taught by Rynning, in order to reinforce and stiffen the base.
Regarding claim 6, Littlejohn as modified by Rynning teaches the molded fiber tray of claim 5 above, wherein the geometric pattern is at least one of a tessellated geometric pattern, a tessellated hexagonal geometric pattern, a tessellated polygon geometric pattern, a three-dimensional (3-D) geometric pattern, a tessellated 3-D geometric pattern, a tessellated hexagonal 3-D geometric pattern, or a tessellated polygon 3-D geometric pattern (Rynning: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Littlejohn as modified by Rynning teaches the molded fiber tray of claim 5 above, wherein the geometric pattern comprises a plurality of geometric sub-patterns (Rynning: Fig. 1).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littlejohn, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Wnek (US 6,988,654 B2).
Regarding claim 8, Littlejohn teaches the molded fiber tray of claim 1 above, but fails to teach the sidewall including a step. Wnek teaches an analogous tray and further teaches that it is known and desirable to provide the sidewall with a step in order to prevent containers from wedging when they are initially stacked and greatly reduce the wedging of stacks of containers when they are being transported (column 5 lines 42-45, column 6 lines 5-20).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Littlejohn by providing the sidewall with a step, as taught by Wnek, in order to prevent containers from wedging when they are initially stacked and greatly reduce the wedging of stacks of containers when they are being transported.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littlejohn, as applied to claim 10 above, in view of Rynning.
Regarding claim 14, Littlejohn teaches the method of claim 10 above, but fails to teach the forming of the molded fiber tray further comprising forming a geometric pattern on the base. Rynning teaches an analogous molded tray and further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide the base with a geometric pattern in order to reinforce and stiffen the base (column 1 line 21-column 2 line 24 and Fig. 1).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Littlejohn by additionally forming a geometric pattern on the base, as taught by Rynning, in order to reinforce and stiffen the base.
Regarding claim 15, Littlejohn as modified by Rynning teaches the method of claim 14 above, wherein the geometric pattern is at least one of a tessellated geometric pattern, a tessellated hexagonal geometric pattern, a tessellated polygon geometric pattern, a three-dimensional (3-D) geometric pattern, a tessellated 3-D geometric pattern, a tessellated hexagonal 3-D geometric pattern, or a tessellated polygon 3-D geometric pattern (Rynning: Fig. 1).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littlejohn, as applied to claim 10 above, in view of Wnek.
Regarding claim 16, Littlejohn teaches the method of claim 10 above, but fails to teach the sidewall including a step. Wnek teaches an analogous tray and further teaches that it is known and desirable to provide the sidewall with a step in order to prevent containers from wedging when they are initially stacked and greatly reduce the wedging of stacks of containers when they are being transported (column 5 lines 42-45, column 6 lines 5-20).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Littlejohn by providing the sidewall with a step, as taught by Wnek, in order to prevent containers from wedging when they are initially stacked and greatly reduce the wedging of stacks of containers when they are being transported.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NINA KAY ATTEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3972. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-4PM 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 Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/NINA K ATTEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3734
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights