DETAILED ACTION
The response dated 12/22/2025 has been entered and is treated below.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 12/22/2025. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 9,362,152 to Wada.
Regarding claim 1 Wada discloses a compound fork device comprising: a first prong and a second prong spaced apart from the first prong (two instances of 33), each of the first prong and the second prong having an upper surface (45) and a lower surface (44) which is depressed relative to the upper surface, the upper surface of the first prong and the upper surface of the second prong being configured to cooperatively retain a first type container (6H), the lower surface of the first and the lower surface of the second prong being configured to cooperatively retain a second type container (6L) having a configuration different from a configuration of the first type container, wherein the upper surface of each of the first prong and the second prong includes a front supporting region (45b) located forwardly of the lower surface, and a rear supporting region (45a) located rearwardly of the lower surface so as to permit four portions of the first type container to be respectively retained by the front supporting region and the rear supporting region of the first prong and the front supporting region and the rear supporting region of the second prong; wherein the lower surface of each of the first prong and the second prong has an inner supporting region (inner part of 44), and an outer mounting region (part of 44 adjacent vertical) located outwardly of the inner supporting region the inner supporting region of the first prong and the inner supporting region of the second prong being located to cooperatively retain a top flange of the second type container; wherein the compound fork device further comprises two upper guiding units (vertical wall adjacent 45a and 45b) which are respectively formed on the upper surface of the first prong and the upper surface of the second prong to guide two sides of the first type container so as to permit the four portions of the first type container to be respectively moved onto the front supporting region and the rear supporting region of the first prong and the front supporting region and the rear supporting region of the second prong; wherein the compound fork device further comprises two lower guiding units (vertical wall adjacent front and rear sections of 44) which are respectively formed on the outer mounting region of the first prong and the outer mounting region of the second prong so as to guide two sides of the top flange of the second type container to respectively move onto the inner supporting region of the first prong and the inner supporting region of the second prong; and wherein one of the two upper guiding units on the first prong is spaced apart from one of the two lower guiding units on the first prong, and another one of the two upper guiding units on the second prong is spaced apart from another one of the two lower guiding units on the second prong (front guiding units, upper and lower, spaced apart from rear guiding units by 43 which divides the space).
Regarding claim 4 Wada discloses the upper surface of each of the first prong and the second prong has a front mounting region (areas of 45b adjacent to vertical wall) located outwardly of the front supporting region, and a rear mounting region located outwardly of the rear supporting region (area of 45a adjacent to vertical wall).
Regarding claim 6 Wada discloses the first prong and the second prong are symmetrical to each other, the two upper guiding units disposed respectively on the first prong and the second prong are symmetrical to each other, and the two lower guiding units disposed respectively on the first prong and second prong are symmetrical to each other (see figures 5 and 6 and discussion of claim 1 above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wada.
Regarding claim 2 Wada discloses all the limitations of the claim but is silent regarding specific dimensions and thus does not disclose a height difference between the upper surface and the lower surface of each of the first and second prongs is in a range from 1 mm to 5 cm.
That said, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of Applicants’ claim to have modified Wada to include a height difference between the upper surface and the lower surface of each of the first and second prongs is in a range from 1 mm to 5 cm because such dimensions are consistent with the system shown by Wada and there is nothing to suggest the range is critical or would cause the device to function differently. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14, 17 and 26-30 are allowed.
Claims 7-10 and 21-25 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 14 is allowable based on its incorporation of elements from claim 16. Claims 7, 21 and 26 are allowable by incorporate all, or portions of old claim 7 which differentiate the claims from the prior art when considered in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/2/2025 with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued that “the alleged upper and lower guiding units in Wada are formed as a continuous and integrated wall. Therefore, Wada fails to disclose "one of the two upper guiding units on the first prong is spaced apart from one of the two lower guiding units on the first prong, and another one of the two upper guiding units on the second prong is spaced apart from another one of the two lower guiding units on the second prong" as recited in amended claim 1. Examiner disagrees and maintains that Wada discloses the language in question as discussed above. The rear upper guide unit is spaced apart from the front lower guide unit and the front upper guide unit is spaced apart from the rear lower guide unit (as the front and rear sections are spaced apart/separated by 43).
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 MARK C HAGEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5547. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:15-4:45 (PST).
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 571-272-7097. 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.
/MARK C HAGEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652