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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/8/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 19, the claim recites “…wherein the colling medium comprises ice.” Please amend the claim to recite - - wherein the cooling medium comprises ice - - for clarity.
Regarding Claim 20, the claim recites “…wherein the colling medium comprises water.” Please amend the claim to recite - - wherein the colling medium comprises water - - for clarity.
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.
Claim 15-20 is 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 15, the recitation of “…positioning the ice bag system proximate the object to cool the object,” renders the claim unclear.
For example, it is unclear what structure the “object” is referring.
Thus, one skilled in the art would not necessarily have the ability to ascertain the metes and bounds of the particular claim limitation.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
For examination purposes, the limitation has been interpreted as - - positioning the ice bag system proximate a structure to cool the object - -.
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.
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(s) 1, 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwase et al. (JP2011020709A) in view of Hsu (2012/0023709).
Regarding Claim 1, Iwase teaches an ice bag system [fig 23] comprising: an ice bag defining a top [250], a bottom [240], a front [210], a back [220], and two side gussets [0013],
wherein the top defines a spout [B’], the bottom defines a bottom opening, and the two side gussets each define a gripping gusset [0013; 0086], wherein the bottom opening extends across an entire width of the bottom [0013; 0086; where contents can be loaded at the bottom].
Iwase does not teach a seal bar attached to the bottom of the ice bag to seal the bottom opening.
However, Hsu teaches a bag [20] and a clamping element [12, 16] for sealing flexible bags [0002; 0020] having a seal bar [12, 16] attached to an open end of the bag to seal the open end [0020; figs 1-3] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a bag clamp that is reusable, simple in design and thereby allows the bag and clamp to be reused [0018].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Iwase to have a seal bar attached to the bottom of the ice bag to seal the bottom opening in view of the teachings of Hsu where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a bag clamp that is reusable, simple in design and thereby allows the bag and clamp to be reused.
Regarding Claim 6, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Hsu teaches wherein the sealing bar is configured to be slid onto the opening [bottom] of the ice bag to seal the [bottom] opening [0020].
Regarding Claim 7, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 6 above and Hsu teaches wherein the bottom of the ice bag is configured to be folded prior to sliding the seal bar onto the opening [bottom] of the ice bag to further seal the [bottom] opening [0020].
PNG
media_image1.png
566
832
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Drawing I
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwase et al. (JP2011020709A) in view of Hsu (2012/0023709) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Meyerhoefer (US3197118).
Regarding Claim 2, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above but does not explicitly teach wherein the gripping gussets each include at least one-fold that defines a gripping surface of the ice bag.
However, Meyerhoefer teaches a multi-gusset bag [Title; fig 1] having where the gussets each include at least one-fold that defines a gripping surface of the bag [col 2, lines 21-38; fig 1; Drawing I] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a bag capable of opening to its full cross section [col 1, lines 29-38].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Iwase to have wherein the gripping gussets each include at least one-fold that defines a gripping surface of the ice bag in view of the teachings of Meyerhoefer where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a bag capable of opening to its full cross section.
Regarding Claim 3, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 2 above and Meyerhoefer teaches wherein the gripping gussets each further include at least one seam that further defines the gripping surface of the ice bag [col 2, lines 21-38; fig 1; Drawing I].
Regarding Claim 4, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 3 above and Meyerhoefer teaches wherein the at least one seam includes two seams [col 2, lines 21-38; fig 1; Drawing I].
Regarding Claim 5, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 4 above and Meyerhoefer teaches wherein the two seams attach the gripping gussets to the front and the back of the ice bag [col 2, lines 21-38; fig 1; Drawing I].
Claim(s) 8, 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwase et al. (JP2011020709A) in view of Hsu (2012/0023709) and Takahashi et al. (JP2000185744A).
Regarding Claim 8, Iwase teaches an ice bag system [fig 23] comprising: an ice bag defining a top [250], a bottom [240], a front [210], a back [220], and two side gussets [0013],
wherein the top defines a spout [B’], the bottom defines a bottom opening, and the two side gussets each define a gripping gusset [0013; 0086], wherein the bottom opening extends across an entire width of the bottom [0013; 0086; where contents can be loaded at the bottom].
Iwase does not teach a seal bar attached to the bottom of the ice bag to seal the bottom opening; and
where the ice bag defines a visual indicator configured to enable a user to view a volume of liquid within the ice bag.
However, Hsu teaches a bag [20] and a clamping element [12, 16] for sealing flexible bags [0002; 0020] having a seal bar [12, 16] attached to an open end of the bag to seal the open end [0020; figs 1-3] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a bag clamp that is reusable, simple in design and thereby allows the bag and clamp to be reused [0018].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Iwase to have a seal bar attached to the bottom of the ice bag to seal the bottom opening in view of the teachings of Hsu where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a bag clamp that is reusable, simple in design and thereby allows the bag and clamp to be reused.
Also, Takahashi teaches a gusset type bag [0048] having where the bag defines a visual indicator [2a] configured to enable a user to view a volume within the bag [0006; 0022; fig 1] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide where the contents are visible [0006].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Iwase to have where the ice bag defines a visual indicator configured to enable a user to view a volume of liquid within the ice bag in view of the teachings of Takahashi where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide where the contents are visible.
Regarding Claim 13, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 above and Hsu teaches wherein the sealing bar is configured to be slid onto the opening [bottom] of the ice bag to seal the [bottom] opening [0020].
Regarding Claim 14, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 13 above and Hsu teaches wherein the bottom of the ice bag is configured to be folded prior to sliding the seal bar onto the opening [bottom] of the ice bag to further seal the [bottom] opening [0020].
Claim(s) 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwase et al. (JP2011020709A), Hsu (2012/0023709) and Takahashi et al. (JP2000185744A) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Meyerhoefer (US3197118).
Regarding Claim 9, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 above but does not explicitly teach wherein the gripping gussets each include at least one-fold that defines a gripping surface of the ice bag.
However, Meyerhoefer teaches a multi-gusset bag [Title; fig 1] having where the gussets each include at least one-fold that defines a gripping surface of the bag [col 2, lines 21-38; fig 1; Drawing I] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a bag capable of opening to its full cross section [col 1, lines 29-38].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Iwase to have wherein the gripping gussets each include at least one-fold that defines a gripping surface of the ice bag in view of the teachings of Meyerhoefer where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a bag capable of opening to its full cross section.
Regarding Claim 10, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 9 above and Meyerhoefer teaches wherein the gripping gussets each further include at least one seam that further defines the gripping surface of the ice bag [col 2, lines 21-38; fig 1; Drawing I].
Regarding Claim 11, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 10 above and Meyerhoefer teaches wherein the at least one seam includes two seams [col 2, lines 21-38; fig 1; Drawing I].
Regarding Claim 12, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 11 above and Meyerhoefer teaches wherein the two seams attach the gripping gussets to the front and the back of the ice bag [col 2, lines 21-38; fig 1; Drawing I].
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwase et al. (JP2011020709A) in view of Hsu (2012/0023709) and Sade et al. (US2019/0023479).
Regarding Claim 15, as best understood, Iwase teaches a method of cooling an object [0086; 0088; 0006; 0013] the method comprising:
Providing an ice bag system [fig 23] comprising: an ice bag defining a top [250], a bottom [240], a front [210], a back [220], and two side gussets [0013],
wherein the top defines a spout [B’], the bottom defines a bottom opening, and the two side gussets each define a gripping gusset [0013; 0086], wherein the bottom opening extends across an entire width of the bottom [0013; 0086; where contents can be loaded at the bottom];
opening the bottom opening [0006; 0013; 0086-0091];
filling the ice bag with a cooling medium through the bottom opening [0086-0091].
Iwase does not teach a seal bar and sealing the bottom opening with the seal bar;
positioning the ice bag system proximate a structure to cool the object.
However, Hsu teaches a bag [20] and a seal bar [12, 16] for sealing flexible bags [0002; 0020] and sealing the [bottom] opening with the seal bar [0020; figs 1-3] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a bag clamp that is reusable, simple in design and thereby allows the bag and clamp to be reused [0018].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Iwase to have a seal bar and sealing the bottom opening with the seal bar in view of the teachings of Hsu where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a bag clamp that is reusable, simple in design and thereby allows the bag and clamp to be reused.
However, Sade teaches a bag [30; 0071; fig 2B]] and positioning the bag proximate a structure to cool an object [0062; 0075; claim 7] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a method or preserving a food product.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Iwase to position the ice bag system proximate a structure to cool the object in view of the teachings of Sade where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a method or preserving a food product.
Regarding Claim 16, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 above and Hsu teaches sliding the seal bar onto the bottom of the ice bag [0005; 0020].
Regarding Claim 17, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 16 above and Hsu teaches folding the bottom of the ice bag prior to sliding the seal bar onto the bottom of the ice bag [0005; 0020].
Regarding Claim 18, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 above and Hsu teaches removing the seal bar from the bottom of the ice bag prior to opening the bottom opening [0005; 0020].
Regarding Claim 19, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 above and Sade teaches wherein the cooling medium comprises ice [0062; 0075; claim 7].
Regarding Claim 20, Iwase, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 above and Sade teaches wherein the colling medium comprises water, and wherein the method further comprises freezing the water into ice [0062; 0075; claim 7].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY L FURDGE whose telephone number is (313)446-4895. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6a-3p; F 6a-10a.
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, Jerry Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/LARRY L FURDGE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights