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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/20/2025 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “system for wedging” in claims 10-11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 1, 9, 15 and 16 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: the means for wedging is disclosed as a wedging protrusion (27) disposed on the platform and a hollow (16), disposed on the base (best shown in Figures 18-20); the Examiner notes that functional equivalent configurations of this structure include reversible snap fit connections.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: in the last two lines, “wherein said clamping lugs being regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface to center the cup within the base” should be amended as follows: “wherein said clamping lugs are regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface to center the cup within the base” or alternatively as “.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 9 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moretti (US2021/0169198) in view of Lee (KR20210058430A) and Gatesoupe et al. (US2011/0011418).
Regarding claim 1, Moretti discloses a receptacle (5, 6, 7, 70; Figures 1-8) for dispensing cosmetic product (refer to Paragraph [0022]) comprising:
a base (7 and/or 70) adapted to receive a cup (4, 40, 4A, 4B, 4C) containing the product (2);
a cover (5) which can be rotated (“The cover 5, meanwhile is hinged onto the lugs internally”, refer to Paragraph [0049]) between a position in which the receptacle is closed (position shown in Figure 4) and a position in which the receptacle is open (position shown in Figures 1-3, 7-8), connected to the base by a first pivot connection (internally to the lugs, refer to Paragraph [0049]; “multiple hinging”, refer to Paragraph [0049]),
an intermediate platform (6) for holding the cup in position (refer to Paragraph [0036]), located between the base and the cover (best shown in Figures 2 and 4) and being rotatable (best shown in Figure 2; additionally refer to Paragraph [0032]) between a closed position (position depicted in Figure 1) adapted to clamp the cup (refer to Paragraph [0035-0036]) and an open position (position depicted in Figure 2) allowing the cup to be removed (refer to Figure 2 wherein the platform is hinged open and the cup/godet, 4, is shown to be removed from the base, 7), this platform being connected to the base by a second pivot connection (externally to the lugs, refer to Paragraph [0049]; “multiple hinging”, refer to Paragraph [0049]), the platform having an annular shape (refer to Figure 2, wherein platform, 6, is depicted as having window, 6A, thereby providing an annular shape), with a central window (6A) allowing free access to the cosmetic product of the cup (the limitation “allowing free access to the cosmetic product of the cup” is interpreted as an intended use limitation; that is, the platform has a window, wherein a user may extend a brush, puff, or other utensil through the window in order to access the cosmetic product of the cup), and a system for positioning the cup in order to limit any relative movement of the cup with respect to the base and to center the cup within the base (the bottom surface of the platform presses against an upper rim of the cup as best described in Paragraph [0036]; additional means 10, are providing for positioning the cup, refer to Paragraph [0041], where these means would tend to position the cup in a center of the base when the cup is sized to engage with the positioning means, i.e. the cup is not positively recited; thus, if a cup was provided having an outer diameter similar to that of the inner diameter of 10, then the cup would be centered about the base when positioned in the base and sandwiched with the platform).
Moretti does not disclose that the positioning system that is configured to bear against an upper rim of the cup comprises an inclined bearing surface of the platform that flares radially outwards towards a bottom of the receptacle, wherein said inclined bearing surface has clamping lugs projecting toward towards the base such that the clamping lugs are adapted to bear against the upper rim of the cup. Rather, Moretti’s bearing surface is depicted as being substantially flat (refer to the cropped and annotated Figure 4, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
587
690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee discloses a similar receptacle (Figures 1-8) comprising a base (40) adapted to receive a cup (10) containing a cosmetic (refer to Figures 3-5, and 7-8 which depict a cosmetic product disposed within the cup; additionally refer to Page 4, third paragraph of the translation which states “the contents filled in the inner space of the contents plate 10”), a cover (30) and a platform (20), wherein a bottom surface of the platform abuts an upper rim of the cup (refer to cropped and annotated Lee Figure 5, below), the bottom surface of the platform comprising an incline that flares radially outward toward a bottom of the receptacle (flare is defined by Merriam-Webster as “a spreading outward”; Lee’s incline is angled outward, and is therefore spreading outward/flared outward; additionally, this limitation is interpreted in light of the specification, wherein the configuration of Lee’s inclined bearing surface is similar to that of the instant application when comparted to applicant’s figure 20; the inclined bearing surface flares downward, i.e. towards a bottom of the receptacle, as best shown in the annotated Figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
970
807
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Moretti’s refill such that the positioning system that bears against an upper rim of the cup comprises an inclined bearing surface of the platform that flares radially outwards towards a bottom of the receptacle, as taught by Lee, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of providing a cosmetic container configured to securely store a refill of cosmetic material.
The combination of Moretti and Lee does not disclose wherein said inclined bearing surface has clamping lugs projecting toward the base such that the clamping lugs are configured to bear against the upper rim of the cup, wherein said clamping lugs are regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface to center the cup within the base.
Gatesoupe discloses a similar receptacle (10, Figures 1-8) for a cosmetic product (“to contain at least one cosmetic article”, refer to Paragraph [0064]), comprising a cup (16) containing the product, a cover (32) and an intermediate platform (36), that bears against an upper rim of the cup (best shown in Figure 2), wherein the intermediate platform comprises an inclined surface (refer to Figure 2) with clamping lugs (62, 82) projecting toward the base and that are configured to bear against (refer to Paragraph [0110]; additionally refer to Figure 2) an upper rim of the cup (refer to Figure 2), the rims being regularly distributed (refer to Figure 5) around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the bearing surface of the combination of Moretti and Lee to comprise clamping lugs projecting toward the base such that the clamping lugs are configured to bear against the upper rim of the cup and are regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface, as taught by Gatesoupe, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of engaging a platform with a cosmetic cup.
Modifying the inclined bearing surface of the combination of Moretti and Lee to have clamping lugs projecting toward the base such that the clamping lugs are configured to bear against the upper rim of the cup and are regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface provides a configuration similar to that shown in the appended figure below, wherein the clamping lugs are configured to center the cup within the base, since these lugs are disposed on an outer circumference of the cup.
PNG
media_image3.png
710
706
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Moretti, Lee and Gatesoupe discloses the receptacle according to claim 1, as applied above. Moretti further discloses wherein said positioning system cooperates with a hanging system provided between the platform and the base (the limitation “hanging system” is being interpreted under a broadest reasonable interpretation, in light of Applicant’s disclosure. Per Applicant’s disclosure, the hanging system is provided by snap-fit between a female coupling means, 9, on the base of the receptacle and a male coupling means, 24, disposed on the platform, refer to Applicant’s Figure 9. Thus, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the hanging system is interpreted as a snap-fit coupling means; Moretti teaches “snap-fit means”, 8A, 8B which secures the base and the platform and therefore constitutes a hanging system; additionally refer to Moretti Paragraph [0033] and Moretti Figure 2).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe discloses the receptacle according to claim 1, as applied above. The combination further discloses wherein said positioning system comprises a plurality of pins (90, refer to Moretti Figure 6) protruding from a bottom of the base (best shown in Moretti Figure 6) and adapted to support the cup (portions 90 are adapted to laterally support cups 4A, 4B, 4C). The combination does not explicitly disclose that the pins are rigid. The combination does however disclose that the entire base may be made of many different materials including PP, PE, PET, PLA, filled PLA, filled PP, ABS, PETG-SAN-PMMA-PC (refer to Moretti Paragraph [0079]), many of which may be processed to provide a final product exhibiting rigidity. Thus, the combination demonstrates that the material of the base and therefore the material of the pins may be modified as a matter of design choice. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the receptacle of the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe such that the pins are rigid, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice; additionally, modifying the pins to be rigid ensures better lateral support of the cups.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Moretti, Lee and Gatesoupe discloses the receptacle according to claim 1, as applied above. The combination further discloses that the receptacle comprises a hook-type closure system (“the fastening system may be of the snap-fit kind. For example, there may be a tab 20 protruding from the support and featuring a first tooth which engages with a second tooth 21 (or with a recess) envisaged on (or in) the cover 5.”, refer to Moretti Paragraph [0027]; additionally refer to Moretti Figure 1) which is disposed/positioned between the cover and the bottom as best shown in Figure 1.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe discloses the receptacle according to claim 1, as applied above. Moretti further discloses wherein all the pieces making up the receptacle are made of the same plastic material (refer to Moretti Paragraph [0079]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe discloses the receptacle according to claim 13, as applied above. Moretti further discloses wherein the plastic used is PET (refer to Moretti Paragraph [0079]).
Regarding claim 15, Moretti discloses an assembly (4, 5, 6, 7, 70; Figures 1-8) comprising:
a receptacle (5, 6, 7, 70; Figures 1-8) for dispensing a cosmetic product (refer to Paragraph [0022]) and comprising a base (7) adapted to receive a cup (4, 40, 4A, 4B, 4C) containing the product (2), a cover (5) which can be rotated (“The cover 5, meanwhile is hinged onto the lugs internally”, refer to Paragraph [0049]) between a position in which the receptacle is closed (position shown in Figure 4) and a position in which the receptacle is open (position shown in Figures 1-3, 7-8), connected to the base by a first pivot connection (internally to the lugs, refer to Paragraph [0049]; “multiple hinging”, refer to Paragraph [0049]), an intermediate platform (6) for holding the cup in position (refer to Paragraph [0036]), located between the base and the cover (best shown in Figures 2 and 4) and being rotatable (best shown in Figure 2; additionally refer to Paragraph [0032]) between a closed position (position depicted in Figure 1) adapted to clamp the cup (refer to Paragraph [0035-0036]) and an open position (position depicted in Figure 2) allowing the cup to be removed (refer to Figure 2 wherein the platform is hinged open and the cup/godet, 4, is shown to be removed from the base, 7), this platform being connected to the base by a second pivot connection (externally to the lugs, refer to Paragraph [0049]; “multiple hinging”, refer to Paragraph [0049]), the platform having an annular shape (refer to Figure 2, wherein platform, 6, is depicted as having window, 6A, thereby providing an annular shape), with a central window (6A) allowing free access to the cosmetic product of the cup (the limitation “allowing free access to the cosmetic product of the cup” is interpreted as an intended use; that is, the platform has a window, wherein a user may extend a brush, puff, or other utensil through the window in order to access the cosmetic product of the cup), and a system for positioning the cup in order to limit any relative movement of the cup with respect to the base (the bottom surface of the platform presses against an upper rim of the cup as best described in Paragraph [0036]; additional means 10, are providing for positioning the cup, refer to Paragraph [0041]; additionally refer to Moretti Figure 4, wherein the cup may be positioned about a substantial center of the receptacle by placing the cup within the confines of the inner circumference of the positioning system, 10), and
a cup (4) containing the product (2) and housed (best shown in Figure 4) in the base of the receptacle.
Moretti does not disclose that the positioning system/bearing surface that bears against an upper rim of the cup comprises an inclined bearing surface, wherein said bearing surface flares radially outwards towards a bottom of the receptacle, wherein said inclined bearing surface has clamping lugs projecting towards the base such that the clamping lugs are configured to bear against the upper rim of the cup, wherein said clamping lugs are regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface to center the cup within the base. Rather, Moretti discloses a substantially flat bearing surface that bears against an upper rim of the cup (refer to annotated Moretti Figure 4, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
587
690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee discloses a similar receptacle (Figures 1-8) comprising a base (40) and a cup (10) containing a cosmetic (refer to Figures 3-5, and 7-8 which depict a cosmetic product disposed within the cup; additionally refer to Page 4, third paragraph of the translation which states “the contents filled in the inner space of the contents plate 10”), a cover (30) and a platform (20), wherein a bottom surface of the platform abuts an upper rim of the cup (refer to cropped and annotated Lee Figure 5, below), the bottom surface of the platform comprising an incline that flares radially outward toward a bottom of the receptacle (flare is defined by Merriam-Webster as “a spreading outward”; Lee’s incline is angled outward, and is therefore spreading outward/flared outward; additionally, this limitation is interpreted in light of the specification, wherein the configuration of Lee’s inclined bearing surface is similar to that of the instant application when comparted to applicant’s figure 20; the inclined bearing surface flares downward, i.e. towards a bottom of the receptacle, as best shown in the annotated Figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
970
807
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Moretti’s refill such that the positioning system that bears against an upper rim of the cup comprises an inclined bearing surface of the platform that flares radially outwards towards a bottom of the receptacle, as taught by Lee, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of providing a cosmetic container configured to securely store a refill of cosmetic material.
The combination of Moretti and Lee does not disclose wherein said inclined bearing surface has clamping lugs projecting toward the base such that the clamping lugs are configured to bear against the upper rim of the cup, wherein said clamping lugs are regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface to center the cup within the base.
Gatesoupe discloses a similar receptacle (10, Figures 1-8) for a cosmetic product (“to contain at least one cosmetic article”, refer to Paragraph [0064]), comprising a cup (16) containing the product, a cover (32) and an intermediate platform (36), that bears against an upper rim of the cup (best shown in Figure 2), wherein the intermediate platform comprises an inclined surface (refer to Figure 2) with clamping lugs (62, 82), projecting toward the base that are configured to bear against (refer to Paragraph [0110]; additionally refer to Figure 2) an upper rim of the cup (refer to Figure 2), the rims being regularly distributed (refer to Figure 5) around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the bearing surface of the combination of Moretti and Lee to comprise clamping lugs projecting toward the base such that the clamping lugs are configured to bear against the upper rim of the cup and are regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface, as taught by Gatesoupe, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of engaging a platform with a cosmetic cup.
Modifying the inclined bearing surface of the combination of Moretti and Lee to have clamping lugs projecting toward the base such that the clamping lugs are configured to bear against the upper rim of the cup and are regularly distributed around a circumference of the inclined bearing surface provides a configuration similar to that shown in the appended figure below, wherein the clamping lugs are configured to center the cup within the base, since these lugs are disposed on an outer circumference of the cup.
PNG
media_image3.png
710
706
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Peters et al. (US2014/0332026).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe discloses the receptacle according to claim 2, wherein said hanging system consists of a snap-fit cooperation provided by snap-fit means disposed on the base and the platform (refer to Moretti Paragraph [0033]) but does not disclose that the snap-fit cooperation is provided between flexible legs provided on the platform and windows provided on the base. Lee discloses legs 26a that engage with grooves, 46, but the grooves are not described as windows.
Peters discloses a similar receptacle (Figure 9) for containing a cosmetic, the receptacle comprising a base (112 or 114), a cover (112 or 114) and an intermediate platform (131) that releasably locks the platform into the base (refer to Paragraph [0032]) via a snap-fit between flexible legs (129) and a window (35) provided in the base. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hanging system consisting of a snap-fit cooperation of the receptacle of the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe consists of flexible legs on the platform and windows provided on the base, as taught by Peters, since such a modification would have involved simple substitution of one known snap-fit configuration for another known snap-fit configuration to obtain the predictable results of retaining the platform to the base.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Moretti, Lee, Gatesoupe and Peters discloses the receptacle according to claim 6, as applied above. Moretti further discloses wherein the base has an inner skirt (9) dimensioned to surround and laterally contain the cup (“laterally contain the godet 4”, refer to Paragraph [0038]) and that the inner skirt may have recesses (refer to Paragraph [0039]), thereby demonstrating that modifying the skirt is within the scope of the invention. The combination does not thus far disclose the inner skirt having a plurality of windows into which the flexible legs of the platform are inserted.
Peters discloses an inner skirt (inner wall of 114, best shown in Figure 9) which comprises a plurality of windows (35, best shown in Figure 9) into which flexible legs are inserted. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the receptacle of the combination of Moretti, Lee, Gatesoupe and Peters to configure the snap-fit cooperation between the platform and the base such that the plurality of windows are disposed on the inner skirt of Moretti, as taught by Peters, since such a modification would have involved a matter of rearranging of parts and it has been held that rearranging of parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Moretti, Lee, Gatesoupe and Peters as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Go (KR200409765Y1).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Moretti, Lee, Gatesoupe and Peters discloses the receptacle according to claim 7, as applied above. Per the modification addressed in claim 6, the flexible legs and windows of Peters were incorporated into the receptacle of the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe. Peters does not provide a figure of the flexible legs engaged with the windows and therefore the combination does not disclose wherein each leg has an inclined wall wherein the inclined wall is in sliding contact with a slice of the window after snap-fitting, allowing to maintain a clearance in closure of the platform according to the clamping of the cup.
Go discloses a cosmetic receptacle (Figures 1-5) wherein a base (200) is coupled to a platform (110 and 120) via a snap connection between a flexible leg (113, Figure 3) and a window (202a), wherein the flexible leg has an inclined wall (113a) in sliding contact with a slice of the window (refer to detailed view of Figure 3, wherein the inclined wall is disposed within a bottom portion of the window and Figure 4 shows the inclined leg being slid upward, thus, the inclined leg is in sliding contact with an entirety of the window/opening and is therefore in sliding contact with a slice of the window, wherein a slice of the window is interpreted as a segment of the window extending into the page). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the receptacle of the combination of Moretti, Lee, Gatesoupe and Peters such that each leg that is coupled to a respective window has an inclined wall wherein the inclined wall is in sliding contact with a slice of the window after snap-fitting, as taught by Go, since such a modification would have involved simple substitution of one known coupling element for another known coupling element to obtain the predictable results of releasably connecting two components of the receptacle. The limitation “allowing to maintain a clearance in closure of the platform according to the clamping of the cup” is interpreted as a functional limitation, that is the coupling means of a flexible leg having an incline slidably engaged with a window provides a structure capable of maintaining a clearance in closure of the components comprising the flexible leg and window coupling. The receptacle of the combination of Moretti, Lee, Gatesoupe, Peters and Go discloses the platform having a plurality of flexible legs, each having an incline in sliding contact with a slice of the respective window disposed on the skirt and therefore provides the function of allowing to maintain a clearance in closure of the platform according to the clamping of the cup.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jeon (KR200206094).
Regarding claims 10-11, the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe discloses the receptacle according to claim 1, as applied above. The combination further discloses a means for wedging the platform in the closed position via snap-fit connection (8A, 8B; refer to Moretti Figure 2). The combination does not disclose at a rear part, a system for wedging the platform in the closed position wherein said system for wedging the platform in the closed position consist of a hollow fitted in the rear part of the base and in which is housed, in the closed position of the platform, a wedging protrusion projecting from the platform, the hollow and the wedging protrusion having corresponding shapes.
Jeon discloses a cosmetic receptacle (Figures 1-4) comprising a base (10) and a platform (20) hingedly connected to a rear (with reference to Figure 3b, the rear part is the right half of the receptacle) part of the base, wherein, at the rear part, means for wedging (7, 3; best shown in Figure 3b) the platform in the closed position (“protrusion 7 formed to coincide with the recess 3 when the cover is closed”, refer to Abstract), the means for wedging the platform in the closed position consists of a hollow (3) fitted in the rear part of the base (best shown in Figure 3b) and in which is housed, in the closed position (position depicted in Figure 3a) of the platform, a wedging protrusion (7) projecting from the platform (best shown in Figure 3b), the hollow and the wedging protrusion having corresponding shapes (the protrusion is depicted as a solid half-sphere whereas the hollow is depicted as a hollow half-sphere, thereby providing corresponding shapes). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the receptacle of the combination of Moretti, Lee, and Gatesoupe such that the system for wedging the platform in the closed position consists of a hollow fitted in the rear part of the base and in which is housed, in the closed position of the platform, a wedging protrusion projecting from the platform, the hollow and the wedging protrusion having corresponding shapes, as taught by Jeon, since such a modification would have involved simple substitution of one known coupling means for another known coupling means to obtain the predictable result of securing the platform in a closed position.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Moretti, Lee, Gatesoupe and Jeon discloses the receptacle according claim 11, as applied above. Moretti further discloses wherein the first and second pivot connections are without metal stud (“pin 11 made of plastic”; refer to Moretti Paragraph [0048]) and are located at the rear part of the receptacle (referring to Moretti Figure 1, the rear part of the receptacle is that part which comprises axis A).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, and 6-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH WOODHOUSE whose telephone number is (571)272-5635. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am - 5pm.
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, EDELMIRA BOSQUES can be reached at 571-270-5614. 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.
/SARAH WOODHOUSE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772