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 species of Group 1 represented by Fig. 2 in the reply filed on 3/25/26 is acknowledged, as is applicant’s indication that the claims readable on the elected species are 17-20 and 30-33.
Claims 20-32 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/25/26.
Regarding claims 20 and 30-31 they are withdrawn from further consideration (along with claims 21-29 indicated by applicant as being non-elected) because they appear not to be directed to species Group 1 (Fig. 2) but instead to be directed to different species. The original disclosure with regard to species Group 1 (Fig. 2) appears to be the figure itself along with the Detailed Description (at specification page 12 last two lines through specification page 13 line 13) and the Summary Of The Invention (at specification page 5 line 26 through specification page 6 line 21).
An Office action on the merits of claims 17-19 and 33 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 18-19 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. The claims are indefinite because each contains features that are claimed as a range within another range. Thus, it is not apparent whether what is claimed falls within the inner range or falls outside of the inner range but inside of the outer range.
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(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brandl et al. (2014/0197066). Brandl discloses a blister pack (Fig. 2) having all of the features of the claim. Thus, the claimed cover film can be laminated film 10. The claimed cover layer of the cover film can be can be layer 21 (Fig. 1), the claimed sealing layer of the cover film can be first plastic layer 11 (Fig. 1) and the claimed one or more intermediate layers can be any one or more of the layers 12-22 (Fig 1). As required in claim 17 the cover layer (layer 21) can be a polypropylene layer. See Brandl [0006] line 13. As also required in claim 17 the sealing layer can be a polypropylene layer. See Brandl [0009] line 3 and [0018] lines 1-2.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(2) as being anticipated by VanLandeghem. (2022/0388749). A blister pack including a cover film is shown in Fig 3. See also the front of the patent. The cover film can be lidding film 14. It is apparent from Fig 1 that several embodiments of the lidding film meet all of the features of claim 17. For example, see the top two lidding films in first row (R1).
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) 18-19 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brandl or VanLandeghem in view of Parvatareddy et al. (2022/0355583). Neither base reference discloses copolymer or homopolymer layers for the polypropylene layers. Nor does either base reference disclose the layer thickness of the copolymer layer as recited in claim 19. On the other hand Parvatareddy discloses in [0216] that copolymer and homopolymer layers of polypropylene are conventionally used in films to form blister packages, and one having ordinary skill in the relevant art has the skill to provide film layers in the claimed thicknesses. It would have been obvious in view of Parvatareddy to provide the cover film in either base reference with the missing features to make the cover films more suitable for particular applications, given the known advantages of polypropylene copolymer and homopolymer layers.
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