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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on March 31, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the process for making the zipper may include minor differences but given the similarity in features and function, the process would not be materially different and that there would not be a serious additional search and/or examination burden. This is not found persuasive.
Claim 1 requires an access hole, however, the access hole can be made by a process other than punching with a hole punch. For example, the access hole can be made by a simple cutter or a laser.
Additionally, claim 6 does not require an access hole but does require a release hole and thus, can be made by a process that does not include punching with a hole punch and does include forming a release hole.
Finally, the process of claim 11 can be used to make another product such as a product without a release hole in the rear flange.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the at least one of the panels” should be --at least one of the panels--.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the at least one of the panels” should be --at least one of the panels--.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a pull tab formed from a portion of the front flange” should be --the pull tab formed from the part of the front flange--.
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.
Claims 4-10 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.
Claims 4 and 6 require a “release hole extending through the rear flange and configured to release the tear strip from the rear flange”. However, the tear strip is only claimed as being coupled with the front flange. Accordingly, it is not clear what structure couples the tear strip with the rear flange and/or why the tear strip needs to be released from the rear flange.
For the purpose of examination, the release hole will be considered to extend through the rear flange.
Claims 5 and 7-10 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, claims 4 and 6.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Katada (US 2020/0231339 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Katada teaches a zipper assembly comprising:
a front flange (130 or 440) having a first interlocking element (142A or 142B) (FIG. 4 or 21);
a rear flange (140 or 130) opposing the front flange and having a second interlocking element (142B or 142A) (FIG. 4 or 21), the front flange and the rear flange configured to be coupled with panels (112, 111) of a bag assembly, the first interlocking element of the front flange and the second interlocking element of the rear flange configured to mate with each other and to separate from each other to provide a resealable opening into an interior volume of the bag assembly (FIG. 4 or 21); and
a tear strip (120 or 420) coupled with the front flange (FIG. 4 or 21), the tear strip configured to be pulled away from the front flange to tear through at least one of the panels of the bag assembly and provide access to the resealable opening into the interior volume of the bag assembly, the tear strip connected with a pull tab (150) formed from a portion of the front flange and configured to be pulled to separate the tear strip from the front flange, the pull tab located in an access hole (151) extending through the front flange (embodiments 1 & 4, paragraphs 47-69, 85-88, 108-116 and FIG. 1-5, 19-21).
Regarding claim 2, Katada teaches the zipper assembly of claim 1 above, wherein the access hole extends through both the front flange and the rear flange (FIG. 20, 21).
Regarding claim 3, Katada teaches the zipper assembly of claim 1 above, wherein the access hole separates the pull tab form a remainder of the front flange (paragraph 62 and FIG. 3, 4, 20, 21).
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 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katada, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Ito et al. (US 2019/0177067 A1, herein after Ito).
Regarding claim 4, Katada teaches the zipper assembly of claim 1 above, but fails to teach the zipper assembly further comprising a release hole extending through the rear flange and configured to release the tear strip from the rear flange.
Ito teaches an opening assembly comprising a front flange (22), a rear flange (25) and tear strip (21) coupled with the front flange. Ito further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide the rear flange with an easy opening release hole (37) extending through the rear flange and configured to release the tear strip from the rear flange (paragraphs 159, 197-204 and FIG. 11, 12).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the fourth embodiment (FIG. 19-21) of Katada by additionally providing a release hole through the rear flange and configured to release the tear strip from the rear flange, as taught by Ito, in order to provide an additional easy opening structure.
Regarding claim 5, Katada as modified by Ito teaches the zipper assembly of claim 4 above, wherein the release hole is positioned with the pull tab between the release hole and a side edge of the rear flange (Ito: FIG. 11, 12).
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katada in view of Ito.
Regarding claim 6, Katada teaches a zipper assembly comprising:
a front flange (440) having a first interlocking element (142B) (FIG. 21);
a rear flange (130) opposing the front flange and having a second interlocking element (142A) (FIG. 21), the front flange and the rear flange configured to be coupled with panels (112, 111) of a bag assembly, the first interlocking element of the front flange and the second interlocking element of the rear flange configured to mate with each other and to separate from each other to provide a resealable opening into an interior volume of the bag assembly (FIG. 21); and
a tear strip (420) coupled with the front flange (FIG. 20, 21), the tear strip connected with a pull tab (150) formed from part of the front flange to tear through at least one of the panels of the bag assembly and provide access to the resealable opening into the interior volume of the bag assembly (embodiment 4, paragraphs 108-116 and FIG. 19-21).
Katada fails to teach the rear flange including a release hole extending through the rear flange and configured to release the tear strip from the rear flange. Ito teaches an opening assembly comprising a front flange (22), a rear flange (25) and tear strip (21) coupled with the front flange. Ito further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide the rear flange with an easy opening release hole (37) extending through the rear flange and configured to release the tear strip from the rear flange (paragraphs 159, 197-204 and FIG. 11, 12).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Katada by additionally providing a release hole through the rear flange and configured to release the tear strip from the rear flange, as taught by Ito, in order to provide an additional easy opening structure.
Regarding claim 7, Katada as modified by Ito teaches the zipper assembly of claim 6 above, wherein the release hole is positioned with the pull tab between the release hole and a side edge of the rear flange (Ito: FIG. 11, 12).
Regarding claim 8, Katada as modified by Ito teaches the zipper assembly of claim 6 above, wherein the tear strip is connected with the pull tab formed from the part of the front flange and configured to be pulled to separate the tear strip from the front flange, the pull tab located in an access hole (151) extending through the front flange (Katada: paragraphs 108-116 and FIG. 20, 21).
Regarding claim 9, Katada as modified by Ito teaches the zipper assembly of claim 8 above, wherein the access hole extends through both the front flange and the rear flange (Katada: FIG. 20, 21).
Regarding claim 10, Katada as modified by Ito teaches the zipper assembly of claim 8 above, wherein the access hole separates the pull tab form a remainder of the front flange (Katada: paragraph 62 and FIG. 20, 21).
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