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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/28/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller (U.S. Pat. No. 7,229,677) in view of Waltermire et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 11,261,017).
Regarding claim 1: Miller discloses a method of making a multi-ply bag, the method comprising:
forming a blank, wherein forming the blank comprises the steps of:
obtaining a first sheet and a second sheet, each of the first sheet and the second sheet comprising a paper layer, see for example (Figs. 1-2; via the shown sheet different layers; for example, 26 and 22 or 26 and flute medium 36);
applying a metallized film to a first surface of the first sheet (via metalized film 28 and/or 24); and
adhering the second sheet to a second surface of the first sheet using adhesive applied intermittently to one of the first sheet and the second sheet (Fig. 3; via folder gluer 62) such that a plurality of voids are defined by the first sheet, the second sheet, and the adhesive, see for example (Fig. 2; via the shown spaces between the adhered sheets 26 to flute 36, appears to be bonded at certain spots of the rising portions of 28);
folding the blank along fold lines of the blank, each fold defining one of a main panel, a side panel, a bottom panel, and a subpanel, see for example (Fig. 1; via the shown folded blank to form container and/or Fig. 3; via folder gluer 62 and/or “cut-out in the blanks for the boxes…and the flexo folder-gluer”);
adhering at least one main panel to at least one other main panel to define walls of the bag, the walls being formed of the main panels and the side panels, see for example (Fig. 1; via the shown walls of the final formed container), wherein the metallized film is arranged to define an inner surface of the bag, the inner surface defining a cavity of the bag (Fig. 2; via “an inside layer” and/or “an inside layer of metallized polyester film (radiant barrier) 24”).
Miller may not suggest the made bag is a “repulpable” bag, wherein the multi-ply bag with all elements of the repulpable blank is repulpable (it is noted though that Miller’s bag is a recycling bag; “paper recycler”). However, Watermire discloses similar method with the step of manufacturing “box blanks is repulpable”, “insulation batt is repulpable”, while the box could comprise metal material “the box 101 can comprise…, metal”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified and/or used Miller’s method to come up with a final manufactured “repulpable” bags, as suggested by Watermire, in order to come up with environmentally friendly made bags.
Regarding claim 2: Miller discloses that the metallized film comprises multiple layers and wherein at least one of the multiple layers is a reflective layer; see for example (“an inside layer of metallized polyester film (radiant barrier) 24 is laminated to 57# kraft liner 26”).
Regarding claim 3: wherein at least one of the multiple layers is a protective layer (via “(protective) corrugated boxes”).
Regarding claim 4: Miller discloses the step of adhering the second sheet to the second surface of the first sheet further comprises applying adhesive to one of the first sheet and the second sheet in an adhesive pattern, see for example (Fig. 2; via the shown bonded pattern of layer 26 with the flute 36).
Regarding claim 5: Miller discloses that the adhesive pattern comprises a first adhesive pattern and a second adhesive pattern (Fig. 2; via the shown different bonding patters and/or columns between layer 26 and flute 36).
Regarding claim 6: Miller discloses that at least one of the plurality of voids is isolated (Fig/ 2; via the shown voids areas between the bonding spots of 26 and 36).
Regarding claim 8: Miller discloses that each of the first sheet, the second sheet, and the film is repulpable, see for example (Fig. 1 & 2; inherently the shown layers and flutes could be separated to different layers individually).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 and 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely sole on the reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In light of the latest conducted interview on 01/28/2026 and the filed amendments/remarks on the same day, 01/28/2026 a New Ground of Rejection took place. The Office as set forth above believes that such argued upon step of “forming a repulpable blank” with “all elements of the repulpalbe blank is repulpable” is old and taught by Waltermire ‘017. It is noted that such step of “repulpable” of materials in the packaging art is old and known and the Office was able to find multiple arts with such teaching of repulpable steps.
Being that said as explained above, ‘017 discloses the step of manufacturing “box blanks is repulpable”, “insulation batt is repulpable”, while having the box comprising a metal material “the box 101 can comprise…, metal”, “top panel 240 can be…metal”. It is clear that ‘017 suggesting a step of providing or using “repulpable” blank with different materials including “metal” to form the final product container.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMEH TAWFIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4470. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Shelle Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
/SAMEH TAWFIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731