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 .
This action is in response to the amendments and remarks received on May 22, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
PNG
media_image1.png
387
548
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Diagram I
With respect to the 35 USC 102 rejection of claims 1-5 and 16, Applicant has argued that KIM et al. fails to disclose flaps that are laterally opposed vertical surfaces capable of receiving a side loading of product. As shown above, figure 27A of KIM et al. illustrates an embodiment of a container having vertically extending flaps of a shorter height configured to define a clearance zone that can facilitate a side loading of a product into the container, with taller vertically extending flaps positioned as deflection surfaces against which a product could be guided. The side by side illustration of the container disclosed by KIM et al. verses the container of Applicant’s invention shows the obvious similarities of the container and the claim limitations.
In response to applicant's argument that KIM et al. does not disclose product contacting the opposing deflection surfaces, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Again, as shown in Diagram I above and as addressed in the response above, figure 27A is found to discloses the container structure as claimed which would inherently result in the container being capable of accommodating product as intended by Applicant.
Likewise, Applicant has amended claims 6-14, 17 and 18 to include functional limitations that the robotic arm of the claimed invention is capable of implementing. Examiner maintains that the modification of HUTTER et al to load a container constructed as taught by KIM et al. would allow for the implementation of the movements of the robotic arm as recited in the amended claimed system (see Diagram III below).
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.
Claims 1-5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KIM et al. (US 6,138,901).
PNG
media_image2.png
397
548
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Diagram II
In reference to claims 1-5 KIM et al. discloses a container formed from a monolithic blank (figure 13), the container comprising: a plurality of side panels (see Diagram II of figures 27A and 6A above) including a first side panel that abuts an attachment tab 66 and a second side panel, the second side panel abuts the first side panel and a third side panel, the third side panel abuts the second side panel and a fourth side panel; a plurality of first top flaps adjacent to one another (see Diagram II of figures 27A and 6A above) uniform in dimensions and continuously adjacent to one another, one first top flap extending from a top side of each of the first side panel and the second side panel to a first height (H1); a plurality of second top flaps adjacent one another, a second top flap extending from each of the third side panel and the fourth side panel to a second height (H2) that is less than the first height (H1), each second top flap is disposed opposite of a first top flap to define a passageway due to the height difference of the first height (H1) and the second height (H2), each flap of the plurality of first top flaps and the plurality of second top flaps are of a unitary formed structure; and a plurality of bottom flaps (along edge 18) that are uniform in dimensions and extending from each of the side panels (figure 13); wherein when assembled, the plurality of second top flaps are laterally opposed to one another and define vertical load bearing deflection surfaces; the first height and the second height define a clearance zone vertically therebetween that is laterally bounded by the deflection surfaces; and the container is dimensioned such that a product can move within the clearance path from a position located over the first top flaps to a position where the product can simultaneously contact both deflection surfaces.
Regarding claim 16, KIM et al. further discloses each of the side panels 11 uniform in dimensions (figure 13; column 3 lines 40-52, column 5 lines 38-43).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 6-14, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HUTTER et al. (US 2016/0137326) in view of KIM et al. (US 6,138,901).
With respect to claims 6, 7 and 17, HUTTER et al. discloses a system comprising: a container 5 having a plurality of side panels and top flaps that define a product receiving space (paragraph [0029]); a robot arm71 supporting an end effector 70 with a fixed orientation relative to the robot arm 71, the robot arm 71 configured to laterally reposition at least one product 2 along a lateral adjustment path (figures 4-5) prior to vertically (figures 6-7) inserting the product 2 into the product receiving space of the container 5; and a vision device as a means for controlling movement of the robot arm 71 along the lateral adjustment path relative to the container. and the end effector 70 (paragraph [0126]).
HUTTER et al. does not disclose the container of the system having top panels of varying heights as claimed. KIM et al. teaches a container formed from a monolithic blank (figure 13), the container comprising: a plurality of side panels (see Diagram I of figures 27A and 6A above) including a first side panel that abuts an attachment tab 66 and a second side panel, the second side panel abuts the first side panel and a third side panel, the third side panel abuts the second side panel and a fourth side panel; a plurality of first top flaps adjacent to one another (see Diagram II of figures 27A and 6A above) uniform in dimensions and continuously adjacent to one another, one first top flap extending from a top side of each of the first side panel and the second side panel to a first height (H1); a plurality of second top flaps adjacent one another, a second top flap extending from each of the third side panel and the fourth side panel to a second height (H2) that is less than the first height (H1), each second top flap is disposed opposite of a first top flap to define a passageway due to the height difference of the first height (H1) and the second height (H2), each flap of the plurality of first top flaps and the plurality of second top flaps are of a unitary formed structure; and a plurality of bottom flaps (along edge 18) that are uniform in dimensions and extending from each of the side panels (figure 13).
PNG
media_image3.png
463
620
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Diagram III
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to provide a container of equal height top flaps or a container having first top flaps of a first height and second top flaps of a second height (greater) height since the disclosure of HUTTER and KIM et al. suggest the equivalence of either configuration of top flaps for their use in the packaging art to transport/ship articles (HUTTER-paragraph [0006]; KIM et al.-column 1 lines 17-27); wherein the selection of either container top flap configuration to enclose a product receiving space of a container formed from a monolithic blank would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see Diagram III above).
In reference to claim 8-14, HUTTER further discloses the system including a conveyor belt 12 configured to support product 6; and the container (as modified) movable along a roller track 40 parallel (figure 8) to the conveyor belt 12. Figures 4-5 of HUTTER et al. discloses the robot arm(s) configured to move product in a direction toward the conveyor belt 12 such that the product is positioned spaced apart from upper edges of the container edges; wherein the provision of a container as modified by KIM et al. could facilitate in the function of the robot arm relative to the top flaps as claimed.
With respect to claim 18, figure 27A of KIM et al. teaches the plurality of first top flaps continuously adjacent in an assembled state and the plurality of second top flaps continuously adjacent in the assembled state; and, wherein figure 13 discloses the plurality of first top flaps continuously adjacent in an unassembled state and the plurality of second top flaps continuously adjacent in the unassembled state.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLORIA R WEEKS whose telephone number is (571)272-4473. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-2pm & 5pm-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, Shelley Self can be reached on 571-272-4524. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Other helpful telephone numbers are listed for applicant's benefit:
Allowed Files & Publication (888) 786-0101
Assignment Branch (800) 972-6382
Certificates of Correction (703) 305-8309
Fee Questions (571) 272-6400
Inventor Assistance Center (800) PTO-9199
Petitions/special Programs (571) 272-3282
Information Help line 1-800-786-9199
/GLORIA R WEEKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
August 24, 2025
Prosecution Insights