Integrally blow-moulded bag-in-container having a bag anchoring point, process for the production thereof, and tool thereof

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 12233589
  • Patent Number
    12,233,589
  • Date Filed
    Monday, March 28, 2022
    2 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 25, 2025
    4 days ago
Abstract
The invention is an integrally blow-moulded bag-in-container obtainable by blow-moulding an injection moulded multi-layer preform. The bag-in-container includes an inner layer forming the bag and an outer layer forming the container, and a single opening, the mouth, fluidly connecting the volume defined by the bag to the atmosphere. The container further includes at least one interface vent fluidly connecting the interface between inner and outer layers to the atmosphere, wherein the bag is anchored to the outer layer at at least one point remote from the single opening and interface vent. The invention also relates to a process and a mould for the production of the blow-moulded bag-in-container.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates in general to new developments in dispensing bag-in-containers and, in particular, to anchoring means for fixing the bag to the container at at least one point in order to stabilize it during collapse thereof upon use. It also relates to a method and tool for producing said bag-in-containers.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Bag-in-containers, also referred to as bag-in-bottles or bag-in-boxes depending on the geometry of the outer vessel, all terms considered herein as being comprised within the meaning of the term bag-in-container, are a family of liquid dispensing packaging consisting of an outer container comprising an opening to the atmosphere—the mouth—and which contains a collapsible inner bag joined to said container and opening to the atmosphere at the region of said mouth. The system must comprise at least one vent fluidly connecting the atmosphere to the region between the inner bag and the outer container in order to control the pressure in said region to squeeze the inner bag and thus dispense the liquid contained therein.


Traditionally, bag-in-containers were—and still are—produced by independently producing an inner bag provided with a specific neck closure assembly and a structural container (usually in the form of a bottle). The bag is inserted into the fully formed bottle opening and fixed thereto by means of the neck closure assembly, which comprises one opening to the interior of the bag and vents fluidly connecting the space between bag and bottle to the atmosphere; examples of such constructions can be found inter alia in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,484,011, 3,450,254, 4,330,066, and 4,892,230. These types of bag-in-containers have the advantage of being reusable, but they are very expensive and labour-intensive to produce.


More recent developments focused on the production of “integrally blow-moulded bag-in-containers” thus avoiding the labour-intensive step of assembling the bag into the container, by blow-moulding a polymeric multilayer preform into a container comprising an inner layer and an outer layer, such that the adhesion between the inner and the outer layers of the thus produced container is sufficiently weak to readily delaminate upon introduction of a gas at the interface. The “inner layer” and “outer layer” may each consist of a single layer or a plurality of layers, but can in any case readily be identified, at least upon delamination. Said technology involves many challenges and many alternative solutions were proposed.


The multilayer preform may be extruded or injection moulded (cf. U.S. Pat. No. 6,238,201, JPA10128833, JPA11010719, JPA9208688, U.S. Pat. No. 6,649,121. When the former method is advantageous in terms of productivity, the latter is preferable when wall thickness accuracy is required, typically in containers for dispensing beverage.


Preforms for the production of integrally blow-moulded bag-in-containers clearly differ from preforms for the production of blow-moulded co-layered containers, wherein the various layers of the container are not meant to delaminate, in the thickness of the layers. A bag-in-container is comprised of an outer structural envelope containing a flexible, collapsible bag. It follows that the outer layer of the container is substantially thicker than the inner bag. This same relationship can of course be found in the preform as well, which are characterized by an inner layer being substantially thinner than the outer layer. Moreover, in some cases, the preform already comprised vents which are never present in preforms for the production of co-layered containers (cf. EPA1356915).


The formation of the vents fluidly connecting the space or interface between bag and bottle to the atmosphere remains a critical step in integrally blow-moulded bag-in-containers and several solutions were proposed in e.g., U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,301,838, 5,407,629, JPA5213373, JPA8001761, EPA1356915, U.S. Pat. No. 6,649,121, JPA10180853. One redundant problem with integrally blow-moulded bag-in-containers is the choice of materials for the inner and outer layers which must be selected according to strict criteria of compatibility in terms of processing on the one hand and, on the other hand, of incompatibility in terms of adhesion. These criteria are sometimes difficult to fulfil in combination as illustrated below. The thermal properties of the materials of the inner and outer layers should be as close as possible for the blow-moulding step, but should differ sufficiently for the injection moulding production of an integral multilayer preform.


Beside the thermal properties, it should be ensured that the inner and outer layers form a weak interface to ensure proper delamination of the inner layer from the outer layer upon use; JP2005047172 states that the inner and outer layers should be made of “mutually non-adhesive synthetic resins.”


As an interface between inner and outer layer is inevitably formed upon blow-moulding, which strength may not always be as uniform as one could desire, due to various phenomena during the blow-moulding stage, such as local heat gradients, differential resin stretch and flow rates at different points of the vessel, etc., the delamination of the inner bag from the outer layer is not always perfectly controllable. It has been observed that the two layers may delaminate preferentially on one side of the bag-in-container due to a local weakness of the interface and, as the bag starts shrinking asymmetrically bending and folding with the risk of forming pockets full of liquid separated from the container's mouth. If this happens, the bag-in-container cannot be used anymore although it can still contain a considerable amount of liquid.


JP4267727 suggests to fix the inner and outer layers at their bottoms without disclosing how to achieve this. In Japanese Utility Model JP7048519, one end of a co-extruded multilayer parison is pinched off such that mutually engaging corrugations are formed, and fixing the structure through an additional device prior to blow-moulding. U.S. Pat. No. 6,649,121 proposes to fix the inner bag to the outer layer by forming at the bottom of the inner layer of the preform to be blow-moulded into the bag-in-container, a protrusion which fits a through hole formed at the bottom of the outer layer and engages mechanically on the outer surface of the outer layer. This geometry appears to be maintained through the blow-moulding process by limiting the axial stretch of the bottom area of the container through the driving downwards of a stretching rod.


Co-extruded parisons as described in the foregoing Japanese Utility Model do not allow the same wall thickness control as when injection moulded preforms are used, which is required in applications in the field of pressurized beverage dispense bag-in-containers. The solution proposed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,649,121 applies to bag-in-containers wherein the liquid contained in the bag is dispensed by decreasing the pressure in the bag and does not allow to dispense liquid by injection of a pressurized gas at a point of the interface between the inner and outer layers because the inner layer's protrusion is not meant to engage hermetically on the outer surface of the outer layer. Indeed, the solution proposed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,649,121 includes that air must penetrate through the interstice between the protrusion and the through hole wall to compensate for the growing pressure drop as a gap is formed between the inner and outer layers upon extracting the liquid by vacuum and the resulting shrinking of the bag.


It follows from the foregoing that there remains a need in the art for an integrally blow-moulded bag-in-container that allows controlled delamination of the inner bag from the outer container upon injection of a pressurized gas at the interface thereof.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is defined in the appended independent claims. Preferred embodiments are defined in the dependent claims. In particular the present invention relates to an integrally blow-moulded bag-in-container obtainable by blow-moulding an injection moulded multi-layer preform. The bag-in-container includes an inner layer forming the bag and an outer layer forming the container, and a single opening, the mouth, fluidly connecting the volume defined by the bag to the atmosphere. The container further includes at least one interface vent fluidly connecting the interface between inner and outer layers to the atmosphere, wherein the bag is anchored to the outer layer at at least one point remote from the single opening.


It also concerns a process for producing a bag-in-container as described above comprising the following steps:

    • providing a polymer preform comprising two layers;
    • bringing the preform to blow-moulding temperature;
    • blow-moulding the thus heated preform to form a bag-in-container;


      wherein during the process, the inner bag is anchored to the outer layer at at least one point remote from the bag-in-container's mouth.


The anchoring may be realized through locally enhanced mechanical, physical, or chemical adhesion between the inner and outer layers, or combinations thereof.


Locally enhanced mechanical adhesion may be provided with a blow-moulding tool comprising for example a sump or depression in which inner and outer layers engage during the blow-moulding process and thus become interlocked.


The sump or depression may be provided in the blow-moulding tool by inserting therein a chime defining said sump or depression. When effecting the blow-moulding operation with the chime incorporated in the blow-moulding tool the interlocking between the inner and outer layers is achieved and additionally the chime is readily fixed to the container.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1A is a schematic cross-sectional representation of a first embodiment of a preform according to the present invention and the bag-in-container obtained after blow-moulding thereof.



FIG. 1B: is a schematic cross-sectional representation of a second embodiment of a preform according to the present invention and the bag-in-container obtained after blow-moulding thereof.



FIG. 2: is a schematic representation of a blow-moulding tool with a bag-in-container therein.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Referring now to appended FIGS. 1A and 1B, there is illustrated an integrally blow-moulded bag-in-container (2) and a preform (1)&(1′) for its manufacturing. The preform (I) comprises an inner layer (11) and an outer layer (12) joined at least at the level of the neck region (6) by an interface (shown on the right hand side). The region between inner and outer layers (11) and (12) may either consist of an interface (14) wherein the two layers are substantially contacting each other, or comprise a gap (14′) in fluid communication with at least one vent (3). Said vent (3) comprises an opening to the atmosphere in (4).


Many vent geometries have been disclosed and it is not critical which geometry is selected. It is preferred, however, that the vent be located adjacent to, and oriented coaxially with said preform's mouth (5) as illustrated in FIG. 1. More preferably, the vents have the shape of a wedge with the broad side at the level of the opening (4) thereof and getting thinner as it penetrates deeper into the vessel, until the two layers meet to form an interface (14) at least at the level of the neck region. This geometry allows for a more efficient and reproducible delamination of the inner bag upon use of the bag-in-container. The container may comprise one or several vents evenly distributed around the lip of the bag-in-container's mouth. Several vents are advantageous as they permit the interface of the inner and outer layers (21) and (22) of the bag-in-container (2) to release more evenly upon blowing pressurized gas through said vents. Preferably, the preform comprises two vents opening at the vessel's mouth lip at diametrically opposed positions. More preferably, three, and most preferably, at least four vents open at regular intervals of the mouth lip.


The preform may consists of an assembly of two independent injection moulded preforms (11) and (12) produced independently from one another and thereafter assembled such that the inner preform (11) fits into the outer preform (12). This solution allows for greater freedom in the design of the neck and vents, as well as in the choice of materials constituting each preform component. Alternatively, it can be an integral preform obtained by injection moulding one layer on top of the other. The latter embodiment is advantageous over the assembled preform in that it comprises no assembly step and one production station only is required for the preform fabrication. On the other hand, the design of the vents in particular is restricted and the respective melting temperatures of the inner and outer layers must be carefully matched depending on which layer is injected first; the rule of thumb being that the layer being injected first generally requires a higher melting temperature.


The inner and outer layers of the preform (1) may consist of different materials or the same material. In case different materials are used, some requirements must be fulfilled depending on the process parameters in the injection moulding of the preform as well as in the blow-moulding of the bag-in-container. It is important of course that both materials may be processed in a rather similar process window and that they will not form too strong an interface which would not satisfactorily release upon injecting pressurized gas at the interface.


Alternatively and surprisingly, good results can be obtained also with preforms wherein both inner and outer layers consist of the same material. Particularly in case of integral, over-moulded preforms, it is generally believed that better results are obtained with semi-crystalline polymers.


The same polymer is considered in contact on either side of the interface between the inner and outer layers in the following cases:

    • inner and outer layers consist of the same material (e.g., PETinnerPETouter, regardless of the specific grade of each PET); or
    • the inner and outer layers consist of a blend or copolymer having at least one polymer in common, provided said polymer in common is at the interface, whilst the differing polymer is substantially absent of said interface (e.g., (0.85 PET+0.15 PA6)inner(0.8 PET+0.2 PE)outer.


      The presence in a layer of low amounts of additives is not regarded as rendering the material different, so far as they do not alter the interface substantially.


Preferred materials for the preform and bag-in-container of the present invention are polyesters like PET, PEN, PTT, PTN; polyamides like PA6, PA66, PA11, PA12; polyolefins like PE, PP; EVOH; biodegradable polymers like polyglycol acetate (PGAc), Polylactic acid (PLA); and copolymers and blends thereof. In case different materials are used for the inner and outer layers, their optimal blow-moulding temperature should not differ from one another by more than 70° C., preferably 40° C., most preferably 10° C., and ideally should have the same blow-moulding temperature.


The two layers (11) and (12) of the preform may be connected by an interface (14) throughout substantially the whole inner surface of the outer layer. Inversely, they may be separated over a substantial area of the preform's body by a gap (14) containing air and which is in fluid communication with at least one interface vent (3). The latter embodiment is easier to realize when using a preform assembly designed such that the inner preform is firmly fixed to the outer preform at the neck region (6) and a substantial gap (14) may thus be formed between inner and outer layers (11) and (12).


The bag-in-container (2) of the present invention is obtained by providing a preform as described above; bringing the inner and outer layers of said preform to blow-moulding temperature; fixing the thus heated preform at the level of the neck region with fixing means in the blow-moulding tool; and blow-moulding the thus heated preform to form a bag-in-container, such that the inner layer is locally anchored to the outer layer at a location (7) remote from the bag-in-container's neck region.


The inner and outer layers (21) and (22) of the thus obtained bag-in-container are connected to one another by an interface (24) over substantially the whole of the inner surface of the outer layer. Said interface (24) is in fluid communication with the atmosphere through the vents (3), which maintained their original geometry through the blow-moulding process since the neck region of the preform where the vents are located is held firm by the fixing means and is not stretched during blowing.


It is essential that the interface (24) between inner and outer layers (21) and (22) releases upon blowing pressurized gas through the vents in a consistent and reproducible manner. The success of said operation depends on a number of parameters, in particular, on the interfacial adhesive strength, the number, geometry, and distribution of the vents, the pressure of the gas injected, and the inner bag stability. The latter can be substantially improved by fixing the inner layer to the outer layer at a location remote from the neck region and mouth of the bag-in-container, such that the interface between inner and outer layers will not release at said anchoring point upon injecting pressurized gas at a point of the interface. The bag is thus fixed at two points remote from one another: the neck region and the anchoring point. This allows to better control the collapse of the bag, which is essential for a reliable and reproducible operation of the bag-in-container.


The anchoring of the inner to the outer layers may be provided by a locally enhanced mechanical, physical, or physical adhesion. Mechanical adhesion includes any interaction between inner and outer layers at all scales spanning from macroscopic mechanical interlocking to cross-crystallinity as well as molecular inter-diffusion across the interface, all phenomena well known to the person skilled in the art. Physical and chemical adhesion is also well studied and involves dispersive forces (e.g., London and Keaton forces), acid base interactions (sometimes also referred to as polar forces), hydrogen bonds, and covalent bonds.


All, but macroscopic interlocking, of the above adhesion mechanisms are temperature dependent and may be locally promoted, e.g., by controlling the local temperature of the interface at the point where anchoring is desired. In case of preform assemblies, an adhesive may be applied at the desired anchoring point prior to fitting the inner preform into the outer one. The adhesive must resist the blow-moulding temperature and be compliant enough to stretch with the preform upon blowing.


Macroscopic interlocking may be achieved by using a blow-moulding tool comprising a sump or depression at the desired anchoring point, preferably at the bottom of the container as illustrated in FIG. 1. Upon blow-moulding the heated preform expands and the inner and outer layers engage into the sump. The angle, α, formed by the sump wall with the surrounding container's body wall maybe greater to or equal to 90 degrees, in which case an anchoring point is formed by enhanced friction between the inner and outer layer at the level of the thus produced protrusion or, alternatively, the angle can be smaller than 90 degrees, in which case a mechanical interlocking of the two layers is formed like a rivet.


Preferably a stretching rod drives the preform downwards during the blow-moulding process to promote longitudinal stretching and to ensure that good contact of the preform with the tool's wall is effected at the desired point of anchoring.


In the case the angle, α, formed by the sump wall with the surrounding container's body wall is smaller than 90 degrees and the mechanical interlocking of the two layers is formed like a rivet, the anchoring point comprises an undercut. The creation of this undercut can be achieved in several methods, some of which are described below.


According to a first method, the undercut is created by using a blow-moulding tool comprising two half-moulds that are only partially closed at the location of the sump, the side walls of the half-moulds at the sump location defining a negative of the anchoring point to be created. The preform is driven down in the sump by means of a stretching rod, where after both half-moulds are moved towards each other to entirely close the mould, creating the undercut.


According to another method, a blow-moulding tool is used comprising axially moving pins that can be introduced in the mould cavity during blow-moulding, allowing creation of the undercut.


According to yet another method, the blow-moulding tool with half-moulds defining a sump negative to the anchoring point to be created. The preform being driven into the sump by means of the fluid pressure applied during blow-moulding thereof. In this method, a stretching rod may be used that either stops at a position distant from the sump or that extends into the sump. In the last case, it is preferred to use a stretching rod provided with a central fluid channel and lateral openings at its distal end (the end extending in the blow-moulding tool) that extends into the sump during stretching, such that part of the fluid used to stretch the preform is guided through the fluid channel and the lateral openings to facilitate stretching of the preform into the sump and against the inner wall the mould cavity defining the sump.



FIG. 2 schematically represents a blow-moulding tool with provided therein a chime comprising said sump or depression at the desired anchoring point. This chime is inserted in the blow-moulding tool prior to blow-moulding the preform, such that upon blow moulding the heated preform expands and the inner and outer layers engage into the sump. In this manner, the desired macroscopic interlocking is achieved and additionally a chime is provided on the container. In the case the sump defined by the chime is designed for the creation of an anchoring point in the form of a rivet, the anchoring point can successfully be created by means of fluid pressure forcing the material of the preform into the sump. Both methods applying a stretching rod and not applying a stretching rod can be used.


A release agent may be applied at the interface on either or both surfaces of the inner and outer layer, which are to form the interface of the bag-in-container. In the case the outer layer is injection moulded onto the inner layer, the release agent can be applied at the outer surface of the inner layer prior to moulding the outer layer. Any release agents available on the market and best adapted to the material used for the preform and resisting the blowing temperatures, like silicon- or PTFE-based release agents (e.g., Freekote) may be used. The release agent may be applied just prior to loading the preforms into the blowmoulding unit, or the preforms may be supplied pretreated.


The application of a release agent is particularly beneficial with respect to the design of the inner layer. Indeed, lowering the interferential adhesive strength facilitates delamination of the inner layer from the outer layer and hence reduces stress exerted on the inner layer upon delamination, as such the inner layer can be designed very thin and flexible without risking that the inner layer is damaged upon delamination. Clearly, the flexibility of the inner bag is a key parameter for the liquid dispensing and moreover costs savings can be achieved in terms on material savings when the inner layer can be designed very thin.

Claims
  • 1. A preform assembly for blow-molding a dispensing bag-in-container, said preform assembly comprising: an inner layer defined by an inner preform, the inner layer defining a volume;an outer layer defined by an outer preform, the inner layer and the outer layer being joined at a neck region by an interface;a mouth, defined by the neck region, in fluid communication with the volume; andan interface vent fluidly connecting the interface to atmosphere;wherein the inner preform is fitted into the outer preform; andwherein the inner layer is anchored to the outer layer at at least one anchor point remote from the neck region.
  • 2. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the anchor point is obtained by locally enhanced mechanical adhesion between the inner and outer layers.
  • 3. The preform assembly according to claim 2, wherein mechanical adhesion is locally enhanced by a protrusion formed by both inner and outer layers.
  • 4. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the anchor point is provided by adhesive which interconnects the inner and outer layers.
  • 5. The preform assembly according to claim 4, wherein the adhesive interconnects the inner and outer layers at the anchor point upon the inner preform being fitted into the outer preform.
  • 6. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the inner and outer layers are different materials.
  • 7. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the inner and outer layers are the same material.
  • 8. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the interface vent is in the shape of a wedge with a largest cross-sectional area at the mouth and a smallest cross-sectional area at the interface where the inner and outer layers meet.
  • 9. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the interface vent is one of a plurality of interface vents.
  • 10. The preform assembly according to claim 9, wherein the plurality of interface vents are distributed around a lip of the mouth.
  • 11. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the inner layer and the outer layer are connected by the interface throughout substantially an entire inner surface of the outer layer.
  • 12. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the inner layer and the outer layer are separated over a substantial area of a body of the preforms by a gap in fluid communication with the interface vent.
  • 13. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the interface vent is located adjacent to, and coaxially with, the mouth.
  • 14. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein each of the inner preform and the outer preform is injection moulded prior to the inner preform being fitted into the outer preform.
  • 15. The preform assembly according to claim 1, wherein the inner layer is anchored to the outer layer, at the anchor point, as the inner preform is fitted into the outer preform.
US Referenced Citations (207)
Number Name Date Kind
2959812 Allen Nov 1960 A
3050773 Hagen Aug 1962 A
3285461 Santelli Nov 1966 A
3450254 Miles Jun 1969 A
3484011 Greenhalgh et al. Dec 1969 A
3491918 Lucas Jan 1970 A
3632004 Grimes et al. Jan 1972 A
3843005 Uhlig Oct 1974 A
3869056 Valyi Mar 1975 A
3878282 Bonis et al. Apr 1975 A
3932104 Schneider Jan 1976 A
3940001 Haefner et al. Feb 1976 A
3955697 Valyi May 1976 A
4013748 Valyi Mar 1977 A
4079850 Suzuki et al. Mar 1978 A
4092391 Valyi May 1978 A
4107362 Valyi Aug 1978 A
4147278 Uhlig Apr 1979 A
4170623 Dubois et al. Oct 1979 A
4233010 Suzuki Nov 1980 A
4243725 Wiggins et al. Jan 1981 A
4250078 McFarlane et al. Feb 1981 A
4273246 Thompson Jun 1981 A
4280859 Thompson Jul 1981 A
4330066 Berliner May 1982 A
4339502 Gerry et al. Jul 1982 A
4378328 Przytulla et al. Mar 1983 A
4381277 Nilsson Apr 1983 A
4408004 Pengilly Oct 1983 A
4417753 Bacehowski et al. Nov 1983 A
4454945 Jabarin et al. Jun 1984 A
4459400 Kuhfuss et al. Jul 1984 A
4476272 Pengilly Oct 1984 A
4510115 Gokcen et al. Apr 1985 A
4529570 Przytulla Jul 1985 A
4609516 Krishnakumar et al. Sep 1986 A
4646925 Nohara Mar 1987 A
4680208 Aoki et al. Jul 1987 A
4696840 McCullough et al. Sep 1987 A
4816093 Robbins, III Mar 1989 A
4818575 Hirata et al. Apr 1989 A
4847129 Collette et al. Jul 1989 A
4863665 Schad et al. Sep 1989 A
4865224 Streck Sep 1989 A
4865234 Folgero Sep 1989 A
4875508 Burke, II et al. Oct 1989 A
4892230 Lynn, Jr. Jan 1990 A
4933135 Horwege et al. Jun 1990 A
4984713 Chambers et al. Jan 1991 A
5012944 Scheurenbrand et al. May 1991 A
5012956 Stoody May 1991 A
5069363 Daimler Dec 1991 A
5197602 Biesecker et al. Mar 1993 A
5219005 Stoffel Jun 1993 A
5242085 Richter et al. Sep 1993 A
5301838 Schmidt et al. Apr 1994 A
5332121 Schmidt et al. Jul 1994 A
5344045 Richter et al. Sep 1994 A
5368195 Pleet et al. Nov 1994 A
5381927 Richter et al. Jan 1995 A
5407629 Schmidt et al. Apr 1995 A
5429702 Grooms et al. Jul 1995 A
5433347 Richter et al. Jul 1995 A
5435452 Nishigami et al. Jul 1995 A
5447678 Kneer et al. Sep 1995 A
5464106 Slat et al. Nov 1995 A
5472753 Farha Dec 1995 A
5508076 Bright Apr 1996 A
5513761 Kobayashi et al. May 1996 A
5529744 Tindale Jun 1996 A
5567377 Nishigami et al. Oct 1996 A
5582788 Collette et al. Dec 1996 A
5647930 Bright Jul 1997 A
5688570 Ruttinger, Sr. Nov 1997 A
5750216 Horino et al. May 1998 A
5780128 Farha Jul 1998 A
5799809 Sako et al. Sep 1998 A
5804016 Schmidt et al. Sep 1998 A
5804305 Slat et al. Sep 1998 A
5819978 Hlebovy Oct 1998 A
5894041 Cornell Apr 1999 A
5908124 Klauke et al. Jun 1999 A
5921416 Uehara Jul 1999 A
5921438 Kobayashi et al. Jul 1999 A
5925710 Wu et al. Jul 1999 A
5927525 Darr et al. Jul 1999 A
RE36410 Meshberg Nov 1999 E
5989482 Sagawa Nov 1999 A
6034167 Tung et al. Mar 2000 A
6039204 Hosokoshiyama et al. Mar 2000 A
6066287 Brady et al. May 2000 A
6068900 Kohn et al. May 2000 A
6083450 Safian Jul 2000 A
6136286 Okuyama et al. Oct 2000 A
6195201 Koch et al. Feb 2001 B1
6197851 Maxwell et al. Mar 2001 B1
6198793 Schultz et al. Mar 2001 B1
6205847 Nomoto Mar 2001 B1
6238201 Safian May 2001 B1
6254820 Cornell Jul 2001 B1
6266943 Nomoto et al. Jul 2001 B1
6276558 Kneer Aug 2001 B1
6312641 Hutchinson Nov 2001 B1
6332726 Yamamoto et al. Dec 2001 B2
6352426 Hutchinson et al. Mar 2002 B1
6359969 Shmaenok Mar 2002 B1
H2018 Giaimo et al. Apr 2002 H
6438199 Schultz et al. Aug 2002 B1
6467653 Hamamoto et al. Oct 2002 B1
6499311 Mahajan Dec 2002 B2
6503440 Kuehn et al. Jan 2003 B2
6503586 Wu et al. Jan 2003 B1
6516839 Timp et al. Feb 2003 B1
6521159 Rashid et al. Feb 2003 B1
6570168 Schultz et al. May 2003 B1
6581803 Yoshimoto et al. Jun 2003 B1
6602568 Semersky Aug 2003 B2
6641881 Darr Nov 2003 B1
6645421 Sanderson et al. Nov 2003 B1
6649121 Hamamoto et al. Nov 2003 B1
6670007 Safian et al. Dec 2003 B1
6676883 Hutchinson et al. Jan 2004 B2
6722102 Pape et al. Apr 2004 B1
6749785 Subramanian et al. Jun 2004 B2
6933055 Share et al. Aug 2005 B2
6981617 Nakamura et al. Jan 2006 B2
7036690 Tsubaki et al. May 2006 B2
7044334 Mita et al. May 2006 B2
7055719 Nomoto et al. Jun 2006 B2
7114636 Yoshimoto et al. Oct 2006 B2
7188751 Van Der Klaauw et al. Mar 2007 B2
7201291 Vigny et al. Apr 2007 B2
7204950 Farha et al. Apr 2007 B2
7253422 Smith Aug 2007 B2
7277158 Dierichs Oct 2007 B2
7303387 Hutchinson et al. Dec 2007 B2
7459119 Ota et al. Dec 2008 B2
7482047 Tremley et al. Jan 2009 B1
7614515 Furusawa et al. Nov 2009 B2
7816436 Harrison et al. Oct 2010 B2
7837927 Morel et al. Nov 2010 B2
8029718 O'Brien et al. Oct 2011 B2
8118183 Iwahashi et al. Feb 2012 B2
9555572 Van Hove et al. Jan 2017 B2
9919841 Van Hove et al. Mar 2018 B2
10668659 Van Hove et al. Jun 2020 B2
10730664 Van Hove et al. Aug 2020 B2
10864671 Van Hove et al. Dec 2020 B2
20010040173 Yamamoto et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020022140 Semersky Feb 2002 A1
20020130139 Shiraishi et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020141071 Singer et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020153386 Uetake et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020190079 Hamamoto Dec 2002 A1
20030031017 Tsuji Feb 2003 A1
20030086524 Schultz et al. May 2003 A1
20030095623 Singer et al. May 2003 A1
20040060889 Yoneyama et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040061930 Wedowski Apr 2004 A1
20040069735 Yoneyama et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040076782 Safian et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040086703 Semersky May 2004 A1
20040112921 Nomoto et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040119961 Singer et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040151937 Hutchinson et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040159983 Clougherty Aug 2004 A1
20040187444 Hutchinson et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040217128 Nakamura et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040227922 Dierichs et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040239908 Bleeker et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040257546 Banine Dec 2004 A1
20050029337 Van Handel Feb 2005 A1
20050103802 Alberg May 2005 A1
20050115054 Brandner et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050133578 Farha et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050136201 Farha et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050270513 Dierichs et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050275818 Singer Dec 2005 A1
20060006586 Farha et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060054635 Iwahashi et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060065992 Hutchinson et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060073294 Hutchinson et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060078089 Masaki et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060091328 Kanazawa May 2006 A1
20060119824 Dierichs Jun 2006 A1
20060132747 Singer et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060138354 Bakker et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060141189 Akiyama et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060160031 Wurm et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060257603 Shi et al. Nov 2006 A1
20070262092 Tyski Nov 2007 A1
20070273853 Bleeker et al. Nov 2007 A1
20080100816 Mulder et al. May 2008 A1
20080272154 Maas et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080257846 Hove et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080257847 Van Hove et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080258353 Hutchinson et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080258356 Van Hove et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080260978 Van Hove et al. Oct 2008 A1
20090057347 Leys et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090206524 Laidler et al. Aug 2009 A1
20100239799 Van Hove et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100243596 Van Hove et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100252583 Maas et al. Oct 2010 A1
20110149200 Joo Jun 2011 A1
20120132607 Landman et al. May 2012 A1
20150210420 Hosokoshiyama Jul 2015 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (107)
Number Date Country
102317051 Jan 2012 CN
2115269 Oct 1972 DE
69632354 May 2005 DE
0118042 Sep 1984 EP
0161185 Nov 1987 EP
189750 Mar 1989 EP
0389191 Sep 1990 EP
0346518 Feb 1993 EP
0729819 Nov 1996 EP
0799683 Oct 1997 EP
0759399 Jan 2002 EP
1048436 Mar 2002 EP
1180424 Apr 2004 EP
1547768 Jun 2005 EP
1167223 Dec 2005 EP
1671776 Jun 2006 EP
1482366 Oct 2007 EP
1245499 Apr 2009 EP
1593605 Oct 2009 EP
2245954 Nov 2010 EP
1356915 Nov 2011 EP
1284918 Jun 2012 EP
2148770 Nov 2021 EP
2138685 Jul 1973 FR
2676958 Dec 1992 FR
2717783 Sep 1995 FR
2866010 Aug 2005 FR
1329257 Sep 1973 GB
S4826027 Apr 1973 JP
S57174221 Oct 1982 JP
S60201909 Oct 1985 JP
S61185417 Aug 1986 JP
H02108516 Apr 1990 JP
H04173134 Jun 1992 JP
H04267727 Sep 1992 JP
H0531791 Feb 1993 JP
H05213373 Aug 1993 JP
H0639906 Feb 1994 JP
H06345069 Dec 1994 JP
H071564 Jan 1995 JP
H0748519 Feb 1995 JP
H081761 Jan 1996 JP
H08175568 Jul 1996 JP
H09150830 Jun 1997 JP
H09208688 Aug 1997 JP
H09308688 Dec 1997 JP
H1010719 Jan 1998 JP
H10500078 Jan 1998 JP
H10128833 May 1998 JP
H10180853 Jul 1998 JP
H10338269 Dec 1998 JP
H1110719 Jan 1999 JP
H1177744 Mar 1999 JP
2000016469 Jan 2000 JP
2000062745 Feb 2000 JP
2001001389 Jan 2001 JP
2001106218 Apr 2001 JP
2001179810 Jul 2001 JP
2002198309 Jul 2002 JP
2002313598 Oct 2002 JP
2004128449 Apr 2004 JP
2004149196 May 2004 JP
3556344 Aug 2004 JP
2005047172 Feb 2005 JP
2005047538 Feb 2005 JP
2005075414 Mar 2005 JP
2006036250 Feb 2006 JP
2006165552 Jun 2006 JP
2006182389 Jul 2006 JP
3935213 Jun 2007 JP
2007276790 Oct 2007 JP
2008254774 Oct 2008 JP
4580524 Nov 2010 JP
4586223 Nov 2010 JP
WO2011010719 Jan 2013 JP
20070012493 Jan 2007 KR
20070119060 Dec 2007 KR
100859229 Sep 2008 KR
100921267 Oct 2009 KR
2133699 Jul 1999 RU
2346871 Feb 2009 RU
82470 Apr 2008 UA
WO1990007414 Jul 1990 WO
WO1990007555 Jul 1990 WO
WO19990003668 Jan 1991 WO
WO19910008099 Jun 1991 WO
WO19910012926 Sep 1991 WO
WO19920011187 Jul 1992 WO
WO19980013292 Apr 1998 WO
WO19990011561 Mar 1999 WO
WO1999033634 Jul 1999 WO
WO2000003944 Jan 2000 WO
WO0185420 Nov 2001 WO
WO20030037725 May 2003 WO
WO2004060748 Jul 2004 WO
WO2004106426 Jul 2005 WO
WO2006124199 Nov 2006 WO
WO2007039158 Apr 2007 WO
WO2006107099 Oct 2008 WO
WO2008129016 Oct 2008 WO
WO2009041809 Apr 2009 WO
WO2009088285 Jul 2009 WO
WO2009154446 Dec 2009 WO
WO2009074285 Mar 2010 WO
WO2010044659 Apr 2010 WO
WO2010014004 Nov 2010 WO
WO2014077681 Aug 2014 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (130)
Entry
I Hwa Lee, Bonding “Unjoinable” Polymers, DuPont Packaging & Industrial Polymers, 2011, packaging.dupont.com, 7 pages. Heiniken Ex. 1029.
In the High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Intellectual Property List (ChD) Patents Court, Particulars of Claim, Oct. 9, 2018, 2 pages.
Wikipedia article, “Crystallization of polymers,” last edited on May 18, 2018, retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crystalization_of_polymers&oldid=841776901.
International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/NL2008/050225 dated Sep. 22, 2008.
Japanese Office Action for Japanese Patent Application No. 2010-504004, mailed on Nov. 2, 2011.
John Bozzelli, What to Do About Weak Weld Lines: Plastics Technology, Apr. 1, 2008, 5 pages, https://www.ptonline.com/articles/what-to-do-about-weak-weld-lines. Heiniken Ex. 1030.
Misko, George G., The Regulation of Packaging by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau: An Added Level of Complexity, Apr. 10, 2008, 6 pages, www.packaginglaw.com. Heiniken Ex. 1022.
Non-Final Rejection dated Jan. 26, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,343, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Apr. 13, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/440,744, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Apr. 4, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/887,189, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Apr. 5, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,365, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Apr. 7, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,426, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Aug. 7, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/919,159, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Aug. 30, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/889,566, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Aug. 6, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 19, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/582,780, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 22, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/115,721, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 2, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,896, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Feb. 12, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Feb. 3, 2010 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,749, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Feb. 4, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,904, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Jan. 13, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Jan. 25, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,419, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Jan. 26, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Banine V. et al, “The relationship between an EUV source and the performance of an EUV lithographic system”, Proceedings of SPIE, Jan. 1, 2000 IEEE, US, vol. 3997,pp. 126-135. XP002493691.
David W. Brooks and Geoff A. Giles, PET Packaging Technology, 2002, 390 pages, Scheffield Packaging Technology, Scheffield Academic Press Ltd. Heiniken Ex. 1018.
Du et al., Polymer Engineering and Science, 2010, 1111-21.
Dynamic mechanical analysis of PET, Thermal Analysis Application No. HB 238, Dec. 2009, 3 pages, Mettler-Toledo TA Application Handbook Thermoplastics. Heiniken Ex. 1037.
Fried, Joel R., Polymer Science & Technology (second edition), Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 2003, 32 pages, Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458, www.phptr.com. Heiniken Ex. 1034.
Advisory Action dated Apr. 13, 2010 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,745, now Abandoned.
Advisory Action dated Aug. 20, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,896, now Patented.
Advisory Action dated Aug. 20, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,904, now Patented.
Advisory Action dated Dec. 1, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Advisory Action dated Jul. 1, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Advisory Action dated Jul. 28, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/954,556, now Abandoned.
Advisory Action dated Jun. 22, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Advisory Action dated Sep. 16, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated May 14, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Article, “Recycling,” section 4.9, in “Plastics and the Environment,” Anthony L. Andrady, ed., published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, 2003, pp. 163-166.
Final Rejection dated Sep. 6, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated May 14, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,904, now Patented.
First Action Interview Office Action dated Jul. 12, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/051,610, now Patented.
Henk Albers declaration—Opposition of EP1.
Charles A. Harper, Handbook of Plastic Processes, 2006, 196 pages, Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Publication. Anheuser-Busch InBev Exhibit 2009.
Dutch speaking court of commerce judgement.
Ex Parte Quayle Action dated Sep. 9, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,904, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated May 13, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,896, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Mar. 11, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,392, now Abandoned.
Final Rejection dated Mar. 11, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Jun. 3, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Jul. 26, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Jul. 16, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Apr. 1, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/853,597, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Mar. 25, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/944,728 Final Rejection Mailed.
Final Rejection dated May 15, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/582,780, now Abandoned.
Final Rejection dated Oct. 20, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/440,744, now Abandoned.
Final Rejection dated Sep. 3, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/419,098, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Apr. 11, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Apr. 16, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,745, now Abandoned.
Final Rejection dated Apr. 21, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Apr. 23, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Final Rejection dated Dec. 4, 2009 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,745, now Abandoned.
Final Rejection dated Dec. 19, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,313, now Abandoned.
Final Rejection dated Feb. 2, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/954,556, now Abandoned.
Final Rejection dated Jan. 16, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/887,189, now Abandoned.
Ariel Gratch Witness Statement.
Avery, Jack, “Gas-Assist Injection Molding,” chapter 1, pp. 1-29, Hanser-Gardner Publications, 2001.
Berger Kenneth R., reviewed by B. Welt, A Brief History of Packaging, (ABE321) Agricultural and Biological = Engineering Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Original publication, Dec. 2002, Reviewed Dec. 2005, http://edis.ifas.ufl. edu, 5 pages. Heineken Ex. 1016.
Charles A. Harper, Handbook of Plastic Processes, 2006, 90 pages, Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Publication. Heiniken Ex. 1028.
Leaversuch, R., “Barrier PET Bottles,” Plastics Technology, Mar. 2003, web: http://www.ptonline.com/articles/barrier-pet-bottles.
Ex Parte Quayle Action dated Sep. 9, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,896, now Patented.
Injection Molding, Blow Molding, Encyclopedia of Polymer Science and Technology, 75 pages, vols. 1 and 3, Copyright John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Anheuser-Busch InBev Exhibit 2010.
In the High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Intellectual Property List (ChD) Patents Court, Ground of Invalidity (EP 770), Oct. 9, 2018, 6 pages.
Clariant, Masterbatches for Thermoplastic Polyester, accessed Nov. 7, 2019. Heineken Ex. 1041. Date of Publication Currently Unknown According to Heiniken Prior Art Notice (ITC 337-TA-1115).
Standard PET preforms & specific developments, PET preforms, 2016, 5 pages, www.pdg-plastiques.com. Heiniken Ex. 1031. Date of Publication Currently Unknown According to Heiniken Prior Art Notice (ITC 337-TA-1115).
Online article, “Co-molding—Overmolding—Plastopia,” https://www.plastopialtd.com/co-molding/, Plastopia Molding Limited 2015-2021.
Online article, “Injection Overmolding—Plastopia,” https://www.plastopialtd.com/overmolding/, Plastopia Molding Limited 2015-2021.
http://www.sipa.it/en/SIPA%20turn%20key%20lines.
Bag-in-a-box (BiB)—Diffpack, Aug. 27, 2018, 7 pages, http://www_diffpack.com/bag-box-bb/. Heineken Ex_ 1020_ Date of Publication Currently Unknown According to Heiniken Prior Art Notice (ITC 337-TA-1115).
Wiley, John & Sons, “Processing and finishing of Polymeric Materials, ”vol. 2, p. 221 (2011) ISBN 978-0-470-88917-6.
Antoni M. et al, “Illumination Optics Design for EUV-Lithography”, Proceedings of SPIE, Aug. 3, 2000 IEEE, US, vol. 4146,pp. 25-34, XP009008840.
Connor, M. et al., “A criterion for optimum adhesion applied to fibre reinforced composites,” 32 Journal of Material Science 5059-67 (1997).
Dr. Ulrich K. Thiele, Polyester Bottle Resins, Production Processing, Properties and Recycling, 2007. 16 pages, Impressum, PETplanet print vol. 6 Heiniken Ex. 1035.
Giles, Geoff A , Handbook of Beverage Packaging, Sheffield Food Techology, 1999, 20 pages, Sheffield Academic Press Ltd. Heiniken Ex. 1019.\
Multilayered blow molded container used for carbonated beverages, comprises resin made outer and inner layers, which are separable.
Norman Lee, Plastic Blow Molding Handbook, Society of Plastic Engineers and its Blow Molding Division, 1990, 18 pages, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY. Heiniken Ex. 1032.
Nyacol Nano Technologies, Inc., Transparent IR Absorbers and Antistatic Additives, Nyacol Applications, Aug. 27, 2018, 3 pages, http://www nyacol.com/application/it—absorbers—antistatic—additives/. Heiniken Ex. 1039. Date of Publication Currently Unknown According to Heiniken Prior Art Notice (ITC-337-TA-1115).
Omnexus by SpecialChem. The Universal Selection Source: Plastics & Elastomers, Thermoplastics Polyester PET, Aug. 23, 2018, 19 pages, https://omnexus.specialchem.com/selectors/c-thermoplastics-polyester-pet. Heiniken Ex. 1036. Date of Publication Currently Unknown According to Heiniken Prior Art Notice (ITC 337-TA-1115).
Sanchez-Valdes, S. et al., Polymer Engineering and Science, Jan. 1998, No. 1, 150-55.
Non-Final Rejection dated Jan. 29, 2010 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,746, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Jan. 29, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,408, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Jul. 1, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/954,556, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Jul. 20, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Mar. 4, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/419,098, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Mar. 26, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Mar. 7, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,313, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Mar. 14, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Mar. 24, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated May 27, 2009 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,745, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Nov. 28, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 1, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/944,728 Final Rejection Mailed.
Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 3, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/853,597, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 9, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 10, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 11, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,904, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 6, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,745, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 18, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,365, now Abandoned.
Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 19, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,896, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 22, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,408, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 25, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 27, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,895, now Patented.
Prof Meijer declaration—Opposition of EP1.
USPTO Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2018-01665, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,555,572, CI 9-13, 71 pp.
USPTO Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2018-01669, U.S. Pat. No. 9,517,876, Sep. 6, 2018, 06 pp.
USPTO Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2018-01667, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,555,572, CI 1 7 8 14-17, 101 pp.
USPTO Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2018-01663, U.S. Pat. No. 9,944,453, Sep. 6, 2018, 06 pp.
USPTO Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2018-01663, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,944,453, 98 pp.
USPTO Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2018-01669, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,517,876, 85 pp.
Requirement for Restriction/Election dated Apr. 27, 2010 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,750, now Abandoned.
Requirement for Restriction/Election dated Aug. 7, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,892, now Patented.
Requirement for Restriction/Election dated Jun. 17, 2010 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,748, now Abandoned.
Requirement for Restriction/Election dated May 27, 2010 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/785,747, now Abandoned.
Requirement for Restriction/Election dated May 30, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,896, now Patented.
Restriction Requirement dated Feb. 18, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/954,556, now Abandoned.
Restriction Requirement dated Jan. 25, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/887,189, now Abandoned.
Restriction Requirement dated Oct. 5, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/450,893, now Patented.
Richard Coles, Derek McDowell, Mark J. Kirwan, Food Packaging Technology, 2003, 262 pages, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Heineken Ex. 1017.
USPTO Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, IPR2018-01665, U.S. Pat. No. 9,555,572, Sep. 6, 2018, 06 pp.
Sarah Van Hove witness statement.
Machine English translation of JP 10-180853, Apr. 2023.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20220396022 A1 Dec 2022 US
Divisions (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 14552343 Nov 2014 US
Child 15853597 US
Parent 12450904 US
Child 14552343 US
Continuations (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 17115721 Dec 2020 US
Child 17706555 US
Parent 15853597 Dec 2017 US
Child 17115721 US