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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 2016 0002788.
KR 2016 002788 discloses a re-closable container (10) with zipper (14), comprising: a container body (12) having an opening at an upper end for receiving and retrieving at least part of a content of the container body (see Fig. 3); and a zipper (14) for selectively closing and releasing the opening, the zipper having a zipper line along which the zipper extends from a first side to a second side of the container body (see Figs. 1, 2); characterised by a notch (either end of 13b) arranged underneath the zipper line and at the first or/and at the second side of the container body, the notch configured to remove the zipper by tearing off the zipper from the container body along a tearing line (13b), the tearing line extending from the first to the second side of the container body (see Fig. 1).
KR 2016 002788 further discloses the notch is a punching out (either end of 13b, product-by-process limitation, see MPEP 2113); the tearing line includes laser scoring for supporting propagation of the tearing off along the tearing line (product-by-process limitation, see MPEP 2113); the container is sealed at the upper end and above the zipper line (see Fig. 1), the container further comprises a further notch (either end of 13a) arranged above the zipper line, the further notch arranged at the first or/and at the second side of the container body, and the further notch is configured to open the sealed container by tearing off the upper end from the container body along a further tearing line (13a), the further tearing line extending from the first to the second side of the container body (see Fig. 1); the further notch is a sharp pencil cut (see Fig. 1); the further tearing line includes laser scoring for supporting propagation of the tearing off along the further tearing line (product-by-process limitation, see MPEP 2113); the container is a pouch (see Figs. 1-3).
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.
Claim(s) 7, 8, and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2016 0002788 in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, KR 2016 002788 discloses all limitations of the claim(s) as detailed above except does not expressly disclose the multiple lines in the further tearing line as claimed.
The Examiner takes official notice it is old and notoriously well known, and is capable of instant and unquestionable demonstration as being well-known, to use multiple parallel lines for a tearing line in packaging pouches as claimed.
It further would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use multiple parallel lines for a tearing line in packaging pouches as claimed, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claims 11-13, KR 2016 002788 discloses all limitations of the claim(s) as detailed above except does not expressly disclose the particular materials as claimed.
The Examiner takes official notice it is old and notoriously well known, and is capable of instant and unquestionable demonstration as being well-known, to use the claimed materials in production of packaging pouches as claimed.
It further would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the claimed materials in production of packaging pouches as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
Claim(s) 9, 10, and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2016 002788.
Regarding claims 9, 10, 16, and 17, KR 2016 002788 discloses all limitations of the claim(s) as detailed above except does not expressly disclose the differing tear forces as claimed.
However, it is noted that the general knowledge of those having ordinary skill in the art since prior to the invention by applicant included the ability/motivation to vary the shape of opening notches in packaging to achieve a desired force required for opening.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the first notch opening force larger than the further notch opening force by a factor of 1.5 to 3, or 2 to 3 or 2, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 15, KR 2016 002788 discloses all limitations of the claim(s) as detailed above except does not expressly disclose the differing notch sizes as claimed.
However, it is noted that the general knowledge of those having ordinary skill in the art since prior to the invention by applicant included the ability/motivation to vary the shape of opening notches in packaging to have different sizes.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to construct the packaging where the further notch is wider than the notch as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER N. HELVEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1423. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-7pm 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.
/PETER N HELVEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
July 9, 2026
Prosecution Insights