DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
All previous 35 USC 112 have been overcome.
Applicant's arguments filed 11/7/2025 in response to Office Action 5/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for at least the following reason:
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that primary prior art Ban does not create a fluid gap (presumably neither first and third [claim 1] nor first and second [claim 11] fluid gaps claimed) between the lid gasket of the cup and the lid rim of the inserted can (page 11, lines 2-3). However, examiner points out that the claim does not positively recite the can, and cannot as it is not part of the invention. The claim instead recites a capability of the cup, lid and lid gasket structures to create the fluid gaps around the can. Please see a detailed analysis in the rejection below showing how/where the gaps could be made, thereby meeting the intended use/function of the claim limitation.
Further, in response to applicant's argument that the fluid gaps and sealing engagement of the can rim to lid gasket are not obvious capabilities that may exist in the prior art combination, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that the angled portion of Ban’s cup as annotated by the Applicant would always stop an inserted can from touching the lid sealing gasket from sealing contact with the inserted can’s peripheral lid rim, and then agrees with the examiner’s citation that the inserted can could contact 153 – which is the cited sealing gasket (page 11, lines 4-6). Examiner first points out that the argued scenario of the can rim not reaching 153 because the inserted can would first touch the angled portion is untrue. How would the beverage can be inserted in the first place if that sizing were true? Examiner points out second that the Applicant appears to realize it is possible for the can to do its claimed function of having its lid rim be able to seal with 153 by stating that the two “would engage”.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that secondary prior art Gu does not teach a fluid gap (presumably the same respective first, second and third fluid gaps noted above) (page 11, lines 6-7). Examiner points out this is merely a piecemeal analysis argument. Also, please see a detailed analysis in the rejection below for how the prior art combination structure meets the amended claim limitations.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that since a figure of Gu shows the can rising/extending above the lid, Gu does not teach the can rim engaging the lid gasket on the bottom of the lid (page 12, lines 2-3). However, examiner points out this figure is not reliable for the analysis. Please see a detailed analysis in the rejection below using different figures.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 5, “any one of claims 1 to 4” should read “any one of claims 1 and 3-4”.
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 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, 3-8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub 20190127130 by Ban (hereinafter “Ban”) in view of US Pub 20220177217 by Gu et al. (hereinafter “Gu”).
Regarding claim 1, Ban teaches a multi-lid heat-insulating cup (Fig 1A) comprising:
a heat-insulating cup body (Fig 1 and [0047], 102) with an accommodating cavity (Fig 1, S) configured to conform to the shape of a can and permitting a can to be inserted therein while leaving an air filled cavity beneath the can at a bottom of the cup body wherein the air filled cavity is configured to create a first fluid gap between the can and an exterior environment and the can is securely held within the accommodating cavity (Fig 1, the accommodating cavity – being of air – is capable of/configured to conform to/accommodate a can, wherein when the can fills part of the accommodating cavity, an air cavity is able to form beneath the can, wherein the air cavity is a first fluid gap and insulates, and the cup body securely holds the can in the cavity (i.e. first fluid gap is a bottom gap portion of the accommodating cavity)), and
a cup lid (Fig 1, 104) detachably connected to the heat-insulating cup body (Fig 1A shows threading of 104 which is detachable), the cup lid being further comprised of:
a drinking mouthpiece (Fig 1A, 120) and a drinking mouthpiece lid being disposed at a distal end of the drinking mouthpiece (Fig 1A, a mouthpiece lid is spout cap 166 and is at a distal end of 120), wherein
an inner top surface of the cup lid is provided with a substantially ring-shaped sealing gasket (Fig 1A, 153 is ring-shaped, with interference snap fit of 152 of 153 necessarily providing a sealing connection [0043]) and the sealing gasket is configured to prevent fluids from entering a space between the accommodating cavity and the can (Fig 1, the gasket 153 is capable of – when a can is inserted – preventing fluids from the can that go through the mouthpiece from also going into a space/portion of the accommodating cavity via can rim contact); and wherein
the cup lid is configured such that
when the cup lid is covering an opening end of the accommodating cavity (Fig 1, 104 covers open end 130), and
the beverage outlet of the pop can is in communication with the drinking mouthpiece (said pop can outlet being in communication with cavity S which communicates with 120), wherein
fluids cannot transfer between a periphery formed between the top surface of the can and the cup lid into a cavity formed between the outer face of the can and the inner face of the sealing gasket (Fig 1A, a cavity beneath an inner face 192 of 153 of lid 104 that is capable of not allowing fluids to transfer (i.e. cannot transfer fluids) between the top periphery of a top surface of said pop can due to contact with 153) and the sealing gasket is further comprised from an at least partially flexible material ([0042] snap fit if ice guard 140 within a bore 126 that continues through 153 necessarily means 153 is of at least partially flexible material too in order to snappingly fit, of [0076] plastic) configured to form a seal with at least one can top surface configuration (capable of forming a seal configuration that cannot transfer fluids, see above) and
the sealing gasket is further comprised of at least one ridge on an outer face of the sealing gasket wherein the at least one ridge is angled perpendicular to the outer face of the sealing gasket (Fig 1A shows a ridge perpendicularly extending from an outer surface of 153, outside of the lower portion with 192) and is configured to seal against an inner face of the top rim of the can to create a fluid-impermeable upper cavity between the sealing gasket, a top face of the can and the inner top face of the cup lid (see said seal top configuration and said cavity wherein fluids cannot transfer, above, that define 153 as capable of sealing off an upper cavity which is between the pop can, the inner face of the lid 104, and 153) such that
the can is sealed inside the accommodating cavity when the cup lid is attached thereto, and wherein the drinking mouthpiece is configured to permit fluid flow from the beverage outlet of the can into the periphery and through the drinking mouthpiece (Fig 1, the can is capable of being sealed in the accommodating cavity S by the container and lid, and the mouthpiece is capable of allowing through-flow that originates from said inserted can through the middle of the sealed periphery (communication flow path)), and wherein
the upper cavity creates the third fluid gap configured to reduce temperature exchange between the can and the exterior environment (Fig 1, the upper cavity is a third fluid gap (i.e. third fluid gap is a top gap portion of the accommodating cavity)).
But Ban does not explicitly teach an inner wall of the accommodating cavity being stepped, for at least two insertable can configurations/sizes.
Gu, however, teaches a similar multi-lid heat-insulating cup (Fig 8, cup with inner wall of 14 and steps 50 and 52) comprising:
an inner wall of the heat-insulating cup body (Fig 8, inner wall of 14) is provided with one or more step portions (Fig 8, steps 50 and 52), such that a diameter of an upper section of the accommodating cavity is greater than that of a lower section (Fig 8, a diameter of an accommodating cavity upper section 48 is larger than a diameter of an accommodating cavity lower section 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the inner wall of Ban with at least a step portion as taught by Gu in order to advantageously offer more variety to the customer through a wider variety of sized beverage cans and bottles in need of insulation on a hot or cold day.
Examiner notes that the resultant combination yields the claimed invention, including the claim limitation:
the sealing gasket (see examiner annotated Ban Figure 1 below) is configured to engage with a top periphery of the can and form a seal over both the opening end of the heat-insulating cup body (Ban, Fig 1, sealing gasket 153 shown sealing at cup open end 130) and a top periphery of the can for at least two can configurations and wherein the sealing gasket separates a top rim of the can and the sealing gasket cavity formed by the cup lid, sealing gasket, and top periphery of the can to create a third fluid gap (annotated Ban Figure 1).
This is because the at least one step portion of Gu, on the inside surface of Ban, define at least two sizes that are capable of fitting at least two can configurations/sizes. Since the can configurations of Gu (at least Figs 14-17) are shown sealing with a lid, and it is known to a POSITA to place a full-coverage type lid (Gu, Fig 10) – like Ban’s – on its own stepped configuration ([0039] “Referring now to FIGS. 10 and 11, a second embodiment of an insulating beverage container 110 includes the same outer container 12 and inner container 14 as the first embodiment, but incorporates a different cover 116.”), it is thereby reasonable that Ban’s lid on Ban’s cup having at least a step portion of Gu is necessarily capable of having Ban’s lid sealing gasket seal with the top periphery rim of a can. Wherein the step portion provides for at least two can configurations/sizes that the lid sealing gasket also accommodates.
PNG
media_image1.png
897
1082
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Ban further teaches the drinking mouthpiece is configured to protrude upwards (Fig 1, 120 protrudes upward of the body), the drinking mouthpiece lid (166) is attached to the drinking mouthpiece by a threaded or snap-fit connection ([0010] threaded or snap fit), and an inner end surface of the drinking mouthpiece lid is provided with a sealing ring which forms sealing with an opening end of the drinking mouthpiece (Fig 1A, gasket ring 190).
Regarding claim 4, Ban further teaches a connecting sheet ([0046] an extension part from 172 to 174, Fig 1A) is hinged to a top portion of the cup lid (Fig 1A, hinge pivot 176), the connecting sheet is provided with a mounting hole (Fig 1A, hole of ring 172), and the drinking mouthpiece lid (166) is constrained within the mounting hole (Fig 1 shows 166 constrained within 172) and capable of rotating around its own axis ([0046] 166 rotates relative to 172).
Regarding claim 5, Ban further teaches the multi-lid heat-insulating cup of claim 1 (see claim 1), wherein the cup lid (Fig 1, 104) comprises
an outer lid (Fig 1A, 106 with 108) and a top lid (Fig 1A, ice guard 140), the outer lid being substantially ring-shaped (Fig 1A, said outer lid is ring-shaped); the outer lid is attached to the heat-insulating cup body (102) by a threaded or snap-fit connection (examiner chooses “threaded”; Fig 1 and [0038] threaded);
a top portion of an inner peripheral wall of the outer lid (Fig 35A, a top portion of 458 nearest 540 forms an inner peripheral wall) is provided with an inwardly extending stop ring (Fig 1A, 150 inwardly extends from a top portion of an inner peripheral wall of 108); the top lid (140) is detachably nested into the stop ring (Fig 1A and [0022], ice guard 140 is removably nested within 150), a bottom surface of the top lid (Fig 2, a bottom surface of 140 nearest line 148) has a downwardly extending substantially ring-shaped wall (Figures 1A and 2, shows ring-shape of wall 144),
a nesting groove in which the sealing gasket (153) is to be nested is formed between an outer periphery of the substantially ring-shaped wall (144) and the inner peripheral wall (Fig 1A shows a nesting groove wherein 153 abuts and nests between an outer periphery of 144 and an interior periphery of 108) of the outer lid (106 with 108), and
the drinking mouthpiece (120) is disposed on the top lid and is in communication with a space defined by the substantially ring-shaped wall (Fig 2 shows space defined by 144, Fig 1A shows communication between said space and 120).
Regarding claim 6, Ban further teaches an outer periphery of the top lid (Fig 1A, 140) and an inner wall of the stop ring (Fig 1A, 150) are detachably attached to each other by a snap-fit connection ([0020] insulator plate 150 secured with snap ring connection, wherein said snap connection necessarily means 150 is detachably attached to 140) through a rib-groove configuration (said snap connection necessarily happens through a rib-groove configuration for example in order to “snap”).
Regarding claim 7, Ban further teaches a bottom portion of the outer periphery of the substantially ring-shaped wall (Figures 1A and 2, 144) is provided with an outwardly extending stop (Fig 1A, ice guard projection 198 stops ice), and the stop forms a position limitation on a bottom surface (Fig 1A, 198 is shown limiting the position of 153 while on a bottom surface of 153 (i.e. the projection defines a limit of initial placement of 153)) of the sealing gasket (153).
Regarding claim 8, Ban further teaches a top surface of the sealing gasket (Fig 1A, 153) is provided with a plurality of upwardly extending elastic catches, the top lid (140) is provided with recesses, and the elastic catches are snap-fitted in the recesses (elastic catches and recesses both, [0042] are created from “detents” in snap-fit connection, wherein the snap has the catches provided with 153 and the recesses on 140 as a result of “detents” forming the snap fit;
wherein the existence of said detents provided with 153 is evidenced by [0044] and Fig 1, “surface 124 defining bore 126” and [0042] wherein “140 must extend out of the bore 126”, meaning the snap-fit of 126 continues from inside 120 through 153 because 124 is of the bore 126).
Regarding claim 11, Ban teaches a multi-lid heat-insulating cup (Fig 1A) comprising:
a heat insulating cup body (Fig 1 and [0047], 102) with
an accommodating cavity (Fig 1, S) wherein the accommodating cavity is configured to receive a beverage can while leaving a first fluid gap at a bottom portion of the accommodating cavity (Fig 1, the accommodating cavity – being of air – is capable of/configured to accommodate a can, wherein when the can fills part of the accommodating cavity, an air cavity is able to form beneath the can, wherein the air cavity is a first fluid gap and insulates, and the cup body securely holds the can in the cavity (i.e. first fluid gap is a bottom gap portion of the accommodating cavity))
and at least a portion of an inner side face of the accommodating cavity is of a size relative to the beverage can such that the beverage can is unable to move laterally within the accommodating cavity (Fig 1, an inner side face of the cup body at the top is capable of fitting a can such that the can cannot move laterally);
a cup lid detachably connected to the heat-insulating cup body (Fig 1A shows threading of cup lid 104 which is detachable) wherein an inner top surface of the cup lid is provided with a substantially ring-shaped sealing gasket (Fig 1A, 153 is ring-shaped, with interference snap fit of 152 of 153 necessarily providing a sealing connection [0043]) configured to interface with a lid and rim of the beverage can (examiner notes a can’s lid is defined by its own lid rim) to create a cavity between a top of the beverage can, the sealing gasket, and the cup lid where the cavity is further comprised of an aperture and the cavity is configured to function as a second fluid gap to reduce temperature exchange between the beverage can and the exterior environment (see examiner annotated Ban Figure 1 above; Fig 1, the gasket 153 is capable of – when a can is inserted into the cup body – contacting the can rim thereby creating a cavity above the cup lid which is an upper portion of the accommodating cavity (i.e. an upper cavity), wherein said cavity necessarily comprises an aperture since both are negative structure),
the cup lid being further comprised of:
a drinking mouthpiece (Fig 1A, 120) and a drinking mouthpiece lid being disposed at a distal end of the drinking mouthpiece (Fig 1A, spout cap 166), and the drinking mouthpiece is connected to the aperture of the cavity of the cup lid (Fig 1, 120 is comprised of a wall and a hollow of a “bore 126”, and that hollow connects to the aperture of the upper cavity).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub 20190127130 by Ban (hereinafter “Ban”) in view of US Pub 20220177217 by Gu et al. (hereinafter “Gu”) in view of US Pat 11225369 issued to Welle (hereinafter “Welle”).
Regarding claim 9, Ban further teaches a top surface of the outer lid (Fig 1A, 106 with 108) is fixedly provided radially inward from a peripheral wall (Fig 1A shows a top surface of 106 extends radially inward from a peripheral wall of 150) of the stop ring (150),
But Ban/Gu does not explicitly teach another assembly element of the outer lid for holding the top lid (examiner’s note: this statement is a paraphrasing of the proceeding claim limitations taught).
Welle, however, teaches a multi-part cup lid (Fig 4A, a top lid 20 with 360) comprising:
a substantially ring-shaped limiting member (Fig 4A, annular clamp 360) made of a flexible material (Fig 4A shows that snap fit groove 346 necessarily causes bending of the material, therefore is of a flexible material), and an inner edge of the limiting member protrudes radially inward (Fig 4A, an inner topmost edge of 360 protrudes inward over a top surface of top lid 20).
The purpose of a clamp limiting member is to reinforce the lid connection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lid of Ban with an outer clamp as taught by Welle in order to beneficially reinforce the secured lid with an additional clamp for the lid to remain better sealed to falls from above waist height through both a general thickness increase at the lid seal and flexible dampening of the ring. In addition, said thickness increase advantageously increases user temperature comfort by providing further insulation for contained hot or icy cold beverages.
Regarding claim 10, Ban/Gu does not explicitly teach that the limiting member is integrally formed with the outer lid.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have made the separate clamp and lid to be integral, since it has been held that rigidly securing parts together as a single unit (e.g. clamping; i.e. Gu clamp 360) used as a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965). Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
US 20180257846 – cup accommodating cavity 80 receives a beverage can and the lid assembly 25 engages and seals to the top e.g. a shoulder of the can ([0030] [0047] Fig 8)
US 9915472 – cup lid engages can lid rim (Fig 3)
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 ERIC C BALDRIGHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 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, Nathan Jenness can be reached on 5712705055. 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.
/ERIC C BALDRIGHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/DON M ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733