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 .
This action is written in response to the amendment filed 08/06/2025
Claims 1-42 have been cancelled and claims 43-62 have been added
Claims 43-62 are presented for examination
This action is Final
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) 43 and 45-48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Randrup (US 3,156,358).
Claim 43. Randrup discloses an article carrier configured to hold articles, comprising:
a main panel;
a first aperture formed in the main panel for engaging with a first article;
a second aperture formed in the main panel for engaging with a second article;
a first cover panel and a second cover panel disposed over the first aperture and the second aperture respectively;
a first connector panel comprising a first outer free edge, the first connector panel being hingedly connected to the first cover panel and disposed to slope down from the first cover panel to the first outer free edge;
a second connector panel comprising a second outer free edge, the second connector panel being hingedly connected to the second cover panel and disposed to slope down from the second cover panel to the second outer free edge;
wherein the first cover panel is hingedly connected to the main panel via a first intermediate panel,
wherein the second cover panel is hingedly connected to the main panel via a second intermediate panel, and
wherein the first outer free edge of the first connector panel and the second outer free edge of the second connector panel are disposed adjacent to each other above the main panel (see annotated figure below also fig. 8 where both outer and inner free edges are sloped).
PNG
media_image1.png
442
483
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is also noted that the free edges share a common boundary at finger grips 28. This defines the adjacent point.
Claim 45. Randrup discloses an article carrier according to claim 43, wherein each of the first outer free edge and the second outer free edge comprises a linear straight edge (fig. 1).
Claim 46. Randrup discloses an article carrier according to claim 43, wherein respective centers of the first aperture and the second aperture are spaced apart over an interspace corresponding with a diameter of one of the articles, which is measured at a widest point of a body of the articles the article carrier is configured to hold (fig. 8).
Claim 47. Randrup discloses an article carrier according to claim 43, wherein the first connector panel and the second connector panel are hingedly connected to the first cover panel and the second cover panel by a first connector fold line and a second connector panel fold line, respectively,
wherein the first connector panel extends from the first connector panel fold line to the first outer free edge, and
wherein the second connector panel extends from the second connector panel fold line to the second outer free edge (see annotated figure of claim 1).
Claim 48. Randrup discloses an article carrier according to claim 43, wherein each of the first connector panel and the second connector panel is angled with respect to the main panel (fig. 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 44, 49-50 and 56-58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randrup (US 3,156,358) in view of Wood (US 3,722,945).
Claims 44, 49. Randrup discloses an article carrier according to claim 43, but fails to disclose abutting free edges. Wood teaches wherein the first outer free edge @30 of the first connector panel 22 and the second outer free edge @31 of the second connector panel 23 abut against each other on an upwardly-facing surface of the main panel, such that the first cover panel and the second cover panel are held in place in their respective covering positions (fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the connector edges of Randrup to abut similar to the edges of Wood to assist in maintaining a closed configuration and tamper evident carrier.
It is also noted that the term “abut is defined as being next to or having a common boundary with.
Claim 50. Randrup discloses an article carrier according to claim 43, but fails to disclose abutting free edges. Wood teaches wherein the first connector panel and the second connector panel abut against each other along an abutment line (fig. 3), and
wherein the first connector panel and the second connector panel extend angled upwardly from the abutment line to diverge away from each other (fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the connector edges of Randrup to abut similar to the edges of Wood to assist in maintaining a closed configuration and tamper evident carrier.
Claim 56-58. Randrup discloses an article carrier configured to hold articles, comprising:
a main panel;
a first receiving aperture formed in the main panel and comprising a first pair of locking tabs hingedly connected to the main panel and spaced apart from each other (diagonally);
a second receiving aperture formed in the main panel and comprising a second pair of locking tabs hingedly connected to the main panel and spaced apart from each other (see duplicate aperture of fig. 2):
PNG
media_image2.png
320
217
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a first cover panel and a second cover panel disposed over the first receiving aperture and the second receiving aperture respectively;
a first connector panel hingedly connected to the first cover panel;
a second connector panel hingedly connected the second cover panel:
wherein the first connector panel and the second connector panel extend toward each other so that each abuts against the main panel (fig. 8; see annotated figure of claim 43).
Randrup fails to disclose a connector edge. Wood teaches wherein each of the first connector panel 22 and the second connector panel 23 comprises a connector edge 26-29 formed by a cut 24 in each of the first connector panel and the second connector panel (fig. 2), and
wherein the connecter edge of the first connector panel extends between the first pair of locking tabs of the first receiving aperture and the connecter edge of the second connector panel extends between the second pair of locking tabs of the second receiving aperture (fig. 1, 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the edges of Randrup to include the connector edges of Wood to ensure an easy gripping of the carrier.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 51-52 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.
Claims 59-62 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but in view of the amendment the search has been updated, new prior art has been identified and applied, and a new rejection has been made.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 RAVEN COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-1672. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm 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, ANTHONY STASHICK can be reached at 571-272-4561. 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.
/RAVEN COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735