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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 17 June 2026 has been entered.
Examiner’s Note
The effective filing date of the claims is the filing date of the nonprovisional application (24 June 2025) because support for the added limitation “the first A-liner end portion … [is] in a folded over double configuration” is not present in the provisional applications (63/665946 and 63/803120).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 25 and 27 each recite “[the] first A-liner end portion is approximately twice the size of the second A-liner end portion.” There is no support for this limitation in the originally filed disclosure submitted on 24 June 2025 (hereinafter “OFD”). While the OFD has support for “the size of one of the A-liner end portion (here, the first A-liner end portion 222) that contacts the box bottom 216 can be doubled so that the A-liner end portion can be folded over double to increase the thickness of the A-liner end portion that insulates the box bottom 216” (see lines 11-14 in paragraph [0042] from the OFD), this portion of the OFD fails to provide any information with regards to the size of the first A-liner end portion relative to the size of the second A-liner end portion.
Claims 26 and 28 each recite “[the] first A-liner end portion is approximately twice the size of the bottom panel.” There is no support for this limitation in the OFD. While the OFD has support for “the size of one of the A-liner end portion (here, the first A-liner end portion 222) that contacts the box bottom 216 can be doubled so that the A-liner end portion can be folded over double to increase the thickness of the A-liner end portion that insulates the box bottom 216” (see lines 11-14 in paragraph [0042] from the OFD), this portion of the OFD fails to provide any information with regards to the size of the first A-liner end portion relative to the size of the bottom panel (or box bottom- see 112(b) rejection below).
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 24, 26 and 28 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.
Claim 24 recites the limitation “the box opening” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 23, the claim from which claim 24 depends does not introduce “a box opening” which may have given proper antecedent basis for the limitations in question. Upon review of the claims, it appears the applicant may have intended to: (1) have this portion of the claim recite “the top opening”; or (2) have claim 23 recite “a box opening” (in line 3) instead of the “a top opening” limitation. Either of these amendments would overcome this rejection.
Claims 26 and 28 each recite the limitation "the bottom panel" at the end of each respective claim. There are insufficient antecedent bases for this limitation in the claims. Each of claims 23 and 1, the claims from which claims 26 and 28 respectfully depend, do not introduce “a bottom panel” which may have given proper antecedent basis for the limitations in question. Upon review of the claims, it appears the applicant may have intended to have these portions of the claims recite “the box bottom” which has proper antecedent basis, would overcome this rejection, and will be examined on the merits as such.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-12 and 23-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2023/0150748 (hereinafter “Sollie”), in view of WO 2023/283701 A1 (hereinafter “Delafosse”), and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2017/0313490 (hereinafter “Tang”).Regarding claims 1, 12, 23 and 24 Sollie teaches a cushioned mailer (liner insulation package) comprising an outer layer, an inner layer defining an inner cavity of the cushioned mailer, the inner cavity configured to receive contents therein, the inner cavity defining an opening at a top end of the cushioned mailer, the opening allowing access to the inner cavity, and an intermediate cushioning layer disposed between the outer layer and the inner layer, the intermediate cushioning layer comprising a textured sheet defining a plurality of cushioning sockets (paragraph [0009]). Sollie teaches first and second textured sheets (A-liner and B-liner, respectfully) 51110a, 51110b are placed within an interior box cavity 61122 of a box 61120 to cushion and/or insulate contents received in the interior box cavity 61122 (paragraph [0193]). Sollie teaches the box comprises a plurality of sidewalls 61128a-d defined by a first box side panel (first side panel) 61128a, a second box side panel (second side panel) 61228b opposite the first box side panel 61128a, a third box side panel (third side panel) 61128c adjacent to the first box side panel 61128a and the second box side panel 61228b, and a fourth box side panel (fourth side panel) 61228d opposite the third box side panel 61128c, the box 61120 further comprising a bottom box panel (box bottom) 61124 connected to at least one of the sidewalls 61128a-d, wherein the sidewalls 61128a-d and bottom box panel 61124 at least partially define the interior box cavity 61122, the sidewalls 61128a-d at upper ends further defining a box (top) opening (paragraphs [0193] – [0195], and Figure 61). Sollie teaches the first textured sheet (A-liner) 51110a is configured to be positioned in the box cavity 61122, the first textured sheet (A-liner) 51110a constructed from a first panel of liner material defining a first liner bend line 61116a and a second liner bend line 61116b spaced from the first liner bend line 61116a, the first liner bend line 61116a and the second liner bend line 61116b dividing the first textured sheet (A-liner) into a first side liner panel (first A-liner end portion) 61118a, a first center liner panel (central A-liner portion) 61114a, and a second side liner panel (second A-liner end portion) 61118b; and the second textured sheet (B-liner) 51110b is also configured to be positioned in the box cavity 61122 adjacent to the first textured sheet (A-liner) 51110a, the second textured sheet (B-liner) 51110b is constructed from a second panel of liner material defining a third liner bend line 61116c and a fourth liner bend line 61116d spaced from the third liner bend line 61116c, the third liner bend line 61116c and the fourth liner bend line 61116d dividing the second textured sheet (B-liner) 51110b into a third side liner panel (first B-liner end portion) 61118c, a second center liner panel (central B-liner portion) 61114b, and a fourth side liner panel (second B-liner end portion) 61118d (paragraphs [0193] – [0195], and Annotated Figure 61, shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
646
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sollie teaches the plurality of cushioning sockets of the textured sheet correspond to a plurality of bubbles (paragraphs [0009] and [0094]), which corresponds to the liner material (of the first textured sheet (A-liner) and the second textured sheet (B-liner)) comprising a first bubble layer defining an upper side and a lower side. As previously mentioned, Sollie teaches the first and second textured sheets (A-liner and B-liner, respectfully) 51110a, 51110b are used to cushion and/or insulate contents received in the interior box cavity 61122 (paragraph [0193]). Sollie does not explicitly teach the liner material comprises at least a first bubble layer formed from a first thermoplastic film, the bubble layer defining an upper side and a lower side, an upper metallized layer joined to the upper side of the bubble layer, and a lower metallized layer joined to the lower side of the bubble layer, wherein at least one of the thermoplastic film, the upper metallized layer, and the lower metallized layer is at least partially comprised of metallized high density polyethylene (MHDPE). Delafosse teaches a sheeting comprising an upper recyclable plastic layer (upper metallized layer), a lower recyclable layer (lower metallized layer), a recyclable fluted plastic layer (bubble layer defining an upper side and a lower side), interposed between the upper and lower layers, at least one of the upper or lower layers (upper metallized layer and lower metallized layer) comprise a base sublayer comprising a metallized film layer coating an HDPE sublayer (metallized HDPE) (upper metallized layer joined to the upper side of the bubble layer, and a lower metallized layer joined to the lower side of the bubble layer, wherein at least one of the fluted layer (thermoplastic film), the upper metallized layer, and the lower metallized layer is at least partially comprised of metallized high density polyethylene (MHDPE)) (abstract and paragraphs [0018] – [0021]). Delafosse teaches the fluted layer may comprise circular-shaped recesses, in a symmetrical repeat pattern (paragraph [0027]), which corresponds to a bubble layer. Delafosse also teaches the fluted layer comprises a PE plastic (thermoplastic film) (abstract). Delafosse teaches the sheeting provides effective thermal barrier properties (paragraph [0026]). Sollie and Delafosse are analogous inventions in the field of insulating liners. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify the cushioned mailer of Sollie with the layered materials of Delafosse to improve the thermal barrier properties of the box, as desired by Sollie. In addition, Sollie teaches the first textured sheet (A-liner) 51110a further defines a first A-liner end and a second A-liner end spaced from the first A-liner end, a first longitudinal A-liner edge extending between the first A-liner end and the second A-liner end, and a second longitudinal A-liner edge extending between the first A-liner end and the second A-liner end opposite the first longitudinal A-liner edge, the A-liner further defining an inner A-liner surface and an outer A-liner surface, and the second textured sheet (B-liner) 51110b further defines a first B-liner end and a second B-liner end spaced from the first B-liner end, a first longitudinal B-liner edge extending between the first B-liner end and the second B-liner end, and a second longitudinal B-liner edge extending between the first B-liner end and the second B-liner end opposite the first longitudinal B-liner edge, the B-liner further defining an inner B-liner surface and an outer B-liner surface (paragraphs [0193] – [0195], and Annotated Figure 61-1, shown below).
PNG
media_image2.png
640
652
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Sollie discloses the claimed invention except for the first textured sheet (A-liner) 51110a is seated in the box cavity such that the outer A-liner surface at one of the A-liner end portions contacts the box bottom, the outer A-liner surface at the central A-liner portion can contact one of the sidewalls, and the other of the A-liner end portions defines a liner lid, wherein the second textured sheet (B-liner) 51110b is seated in the box cavity such that one of the first longitudinal B-liner edge and the second longitudinal B-liner edge rests atop the A-liner end portion contacting the box bottom, the other of the first longitudinal B-liner edge and the second longitudinal B-liner longitudinal edge defines a liner ridge, and such that the outer B-liner surface can contact the sidewalls of the box that are not contacted by the outer A-liner surface at the central A-liner portion. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to change the orientation of the first and second textured sheets within the box, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP §2144.04(VI)(C). Such a change to the orientation of the first and second textured sheets within the box is illustrated below (Annotated Figure 61-2).
PNG
media_image3.png
535
437
media_image3.png
Greyscale
This modification corresponds to the claimed features requiring: (1) the A-liner is seated in the box cavity such that the first A-liner end portion contacts the box bottom (from claim 1); and (2) the outer A-liner surface at the central A-liner portion can contact one of the sidewalls, and the other of the A-liner end portions defines a liner lid, wherein the B-liner is seated in the box cavity such that one of the first longitudinal B-liner edge and the second longitudinal B-liner edge rests atop the first A-liner end portion contacting the box bottom, the other of the first longitudinal B-liner edge and the second longitudinal B-liner longitudinal edge defines a liner ridge, and such that the outer B-liner surface can contact the sidewalls of the box that are not contacted by the outer A-liner surface at the central A-liner portion, wherein the B-liner end consisting of one of the first B-liner end and the second B-liner end can contact the inner A-liner surface at the central A-liner portion (from claim 12). See also Annotated Figure 61-1, shown above. Sollie also teaches an embodiment where the cushioned mailer is sealed to itself or an adjacent layer to close the cavity defined therein, where the seal is facilitated by a tape, adhesive, or other suitable fastener (defining a tight seam between adjacent layers, the tight seam excluding any air gaps) (paragraph [0117]). Sollie does not explicitly teach sealing the first textured sheet (A-liner) 51110a to the second textured sheet (B-liner) 51110b in the embodiment taught in paragraphs [0193] – [0195] and Figure 61. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the interface between the first textured sheet (A-liner) 51110a and the second textured sheet (B-liner) 51110b of the embodiment disclosed in paragraphs [0193] – [0195] and Figure 61, as modified in the rearrangement rationale disclosed above, with the sealing means disclosed in paragraph [0117] to facilitate a means of closing the interior box cavity 61122 of the box 61120 in such an embodiment. This modification corresponds to the B-liner end consisting of one of the first B-liner end and the second B-liner end can contact the inner A-liner surface at the central A-liner portion to define a tight seam between the B-liner end and the central A-liner portion, the tight seam excluding any air gaps between the B-liner end and the central A-liner portion. In addition, Sollie teaches the sockets (plurality of encapsulated bubbles) of the textured sheet provides the cushioning effect to the cushioned/textured mailer (paragraphs [0009], [0101] and [0131]). Sollie does not explicitly teach the first side liner panel (first A-liner end portion) 61118a that contacts the box bottom has a folded over double configuration. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the invention to provide a double layered structure to the first side liner panel (first A-liner end portion) 61118a to double the thickness of and increase the cushioning support of the cushioned/textured mailer in an area of the box bottom. It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(B). Sollie does not explicitly teach the double layered structure has a folded over structure (folded over double configuration). Tang teaches a buffering inflatable packaging bag used as a cushion (abstract and paragraph [0003]). Tang teaches the packaging bag includes a double-layer structure formed by folding the bag onto itself (double layered structure having a folded over structure (folded over double configuration)) (paragraph [0015] and Figure 6). Sollie and Tang are analogous inventions in the field of packaging/cushioning materials. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the double layered structure of the first side liner panel (first A-liner end portion) 61118a of Sollie with the folded over structure (folded over double configuration) of Tang to provide the first side liner panel (first A-liner end portion) 61118a of Sollie with a conventional double layered structure.Regarding claim 2 The combination of Sollie and Delafosse discloses the claimed invention except for the liner material further comprises a second bubble layer formed from a second thermoplastic film, the second bubble layer defining an upper side and a lower side, and a lower metallized layer joined to the lower side of the second bubble layer, wherein the upper side of the second bubble layer is joined to the lower metallized layer of the first bubble layer. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide an additional fluted layer (second bubble layer formed from a second thermoplastic film) and additional recyclable plastic layer (lower metallized layer) stacked on the sheeting disclosed by Delafosse to further improve the thermal insulative barrier properties of the sheeting. It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B). The stacking of the additional fluted layer and additional recyclable plastic layer corresponds to the claimed limitation requiring the second bubble layer defining an upper side and a lower side, and a lower metallized layer joined to the lower side of the second bubble layer, wherein the upper side of the second bubble layer is joined to the lower metallized layer of the first bubble layer.Regarding claim 3 The combination of Sollie and Delafosse discloses the claimed invention except for the liner material further comprises a third bubble layer formed from a third thermoplastic film, the third bubble layer defining an upper side and a lower side, and a lower metallized layer joined to the lower side of the third bubble layer, wherein the upper side of the third bubble layer is joined to the lower metallized layer of the second bubble layer. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide an additional fluted layer (third bubble layer formed from a third thermoplastic film) and additional recyclable plastic layer (lower metallized layer) stacked on the sheeting disclosed by Delafosse to further improve the thermal insulative barrier properties of the sheeting. It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B). The stacking of the additional fluted layer and additional recyclable plastic layer corresponds to the claimed limitation requiring the third bubble layer defining an upper side and a lower side, and a lower metallized layer joined to the lower side of the third bubble layer, wherein the upper side of the third bubble layer is joined to the lower metallized layer of the second bubble layer.Regarding claim 4 In addition, Sollie teaches an adhesive may be used to secure adjacent layers together (paragraph [0088]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the interface between the third bubble layer and the second bubble layer, from the combination of Sollie and Delafosse, with the adhesive disclosed by Sollie to secure the third bubble layer and the second bubble layer together.Regarding claims 5 and 6 In addition, Delafosse teaches the upper (metallized) layer and the lower (metallized) layer of the fluted layer (first bubble layer) each comprise a metallized film layer (first material layer comprising a metallized film) coating an HDPE sublayer (second material layer) (abstract and paragraphs [0018] – [0021]).Regarding claim 7 In addition, Delafosse generally teaches the plastics material can be any plastics material capable of extrusion or other process to result in a sheet form, and the density of the material used can depend on the intended application (paragraph [0116]). Delafosse does not explicitly teach the metallized high density polyethylene has a density ranging from and including 931 kg/m3 to and including 970 kg/m3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to determine a suitable density of the metallized high density polyethylene using nothing more than routine experimentation depending on its intended application. It has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art unless such a range is shown to be critical. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A).Regarding claim 8 In addition, Delafosse teaches the fluted plastic layer (first thermoplastic film), the upper plastic layer (upper metallized layer), and the lower plastic layer (lower metallized layer) comprise recyclable material (abstract).Regarding claim 9 In addition, Delafosse teaches the plastic material used can be any plastic or combination of recyclable plastics and/or recyclable plastics with additives (paragraph [0114]). Delafosse also teaches the plastics material can be a composite material, where the composite material may include PE, calcium carbonate or talcum, and recycled PE, and the percentages of polyethylene, calcium carbonate or talcum, and recycled polyethylene can depend on the application of the sheeting (paragraph [0115]). Delafosse does not explicitly teach the liner material comprises recyclable material from and including 15% to and including 40% of the liner material. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to determine a suitable quantity of recyclable material in the liner material using nothing more than routine experimentation depending on its intended application. It has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art unless such a range is shown to be critical. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A).Regarding claim 10 In addition, Delafosse teaches the upper (metallized) layer and the lower (metallized) layer of the fluted layer (first bubble layer) each comprise a metallized film layer (single layer of metallized film) coating an HDPE sublayer (abstract and paragraphs [0018] – [0021]). Regarding claim 11 In addition, Delafosse teaches the upper (metallized) layer and the lower (metallized) layer of the fluted layer (first bubble layer) each comprise a metallized film layer (layer of metallized film) coating an HDPE sublayer (abstract and paragraphs [0018] – [0021]). Delafosse discloses the claimed invention except for the metallized film layer comprising a double layer of metallized film. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide an additional metallized film layer to at least one of the upper (metallized) layer and the lower (metallized) layer of the fluted layer (first bubble layer) to further improve the thermal insulative barrier properties of the sheeting that is facilitated by the metallized film layer. It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B).Regarding claims 25 and 27 In addition, the combination of Sollie and Tang does not explicitly teach the first A-liner end portion is approximately twice the size of the second A-liner end portion. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to determine the size of the first A-liner end portion relative to the size of the second A-liner end portion using nothing more than routine experimentation to achieve the folded over double layered structure of the first side liner panel from the combination of Sollie and Tang. It has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art unless such a range is shown to be critical. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A). Regarding claims 26 and 28 In addition, the combination of Sollie and Tang does not explicitly teach the first A-liner end portion is approximately twice the size of the bottom panel (box bottom). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to determine the size of the first A-liner end portion relative to the size of the bottom panel (box bottom) using nothing more than routine experimentation to achieve the folded over double layered structure of the first side liner panel from the combination of Sollie and Tang. It has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art unless such a range is shown to be critical. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sollie, Delafosse, and Tang as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0267081 (hereinafter “Conway”), and United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2024/0002117 (hereinafter “Kapinos”).Regarding claim 13 The limitations from claim 12 have been set forth above. In addition, Sollie illustrates the A-liner as seated in the box cavity defines an A-liner height, the B-liner as seated in the box cavity defines a B-liner height, and the sidewalls 61128a-d define a box height (Annotated Figure 61-2, shown above). Sollie teaches a top box panel (not shown) can be formed at the top box end 61126 of the box (paragraph [0195]). Sollie does not explicitly teach the top box panel comprises a first top flap joined to the first side panel by a first fold line, a second top flap joined to the second side panel by a second fold line, a third top flap joined to the third side panel by a third fold line, and a fourth top flap joined to the fourth side panel by a fourth fold line. Conway teaches a conventional box having a plurality of sidewalls (side panels) 127-1 through 127-4, a plurality of bottom closure flaps, and a plurality of top closure flaps 129-1 through 129-4 (paragraph [0074]). Conway teaches a first top closure flap 129-1 is joined to a first sidewall (side panel) 127-1 by a first fold line, a second top closure flap 129-2 is joined to a second sidewall (side panel) 127-2 by a second fold line, a third top closure flap 129-3 is joined to a third sidewall (side panel) 127-3 by a third fold line, and a fourth top closure flap 129-4 joined to the fourth sidewall (side panel) 127-4 by a fourth fold line (Figure 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the top box panel of Sollie from the plurality of top closure flaps disclosed by Conway motivated by the expectation of successfully practicing the invention of a conventional top box panel for a packaging box. Sollie does not explicitly teach the box height is smaller than the A-liner height and smaller than the B-liner height, wherein the A-liner and the B-liner undergo compression upon closure of the liner lid across the liner ridge and closure of the first top flap, the second top flap, the third top flap, and the fourth top flap across the box opening, the compression effecting a sealing engagement of the A-liner and the B-liner with one another and with the box. Kapinos teaches in packaging applications, components loosely packaged therein may shift during transit causing damage (paragraph [0030]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the size of the box of Sollie to facilitate a compressive force onto the components packaged therein (compression effecting a sealing engagement of the materials located within the packaging) upon closing the lid to prevent shifting and possible damage to said components from the components being loosely packaged. Such a modification corresponds to the box height being smaller than the A-liner height and smaller than the B-liner height from Sollie.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-13, filed 17 June 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-12, 23 and 24 under 35 USC §103 as being unpatentable over Sollie and Delafosse have been fully considered and are persuasive. In summary, the combination of Sollie and Delafosse, as relied upon in the previous Office action, did not teach or render obvious the added limitation to the claims requiring a folded over double configuration of the first A-liner end portion. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of additional teachings from Sollie in combination with the additional consideration of Tang.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN HANDVILLE whose telephone number is (571)272-5074. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, from 9 am to 4 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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571) 272-8519. 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.
/BRIAN HANDVILLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights