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 10/09/2025
Claims 1-21 are presented for examination
This action is Non-Final
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) 4-5 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogg (US 2008/0257763) in view of Spivey Jr. et al. (US 2015/0321817).
Claim 4: Ogg discloses a package comprising a group of articles C each having a top and a bottom, an upper engaging member 14 in engagement with the tops of at least some of the articles of the group, wherein the upper engagement member is in engagement with at least one of an outer-most articles of the articles of the group via an aperture 30 formed in the upper engaging member, a lower supporting member 12 supporting the bottoms of the articles of the group, wherein the upper engaging member is spaced apart from the lower supporting member such that the upper engaging member is connected to the lower supporting member by no part of the package but by the articles of the group (fig. 1-2).
Ogg discloses a carrying tray but fails to disclose supporting handles on the tray. Spivey teaches wherein the lower supporting member 364 comprises a plurality of carrying handles 373a,b ([0046]; fig. 6B). 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 lower tray of Ogg to include the handles of Spivey to assist in easily gripping and transporting the packaged assembly.
Claim 5: Ogg discloses a package comprising a group of articles C each having a top and a bottom, an upper engaging member 14 in engagement with the tops of at least some of the articles of the group, wherein the upper engagement member is in engagement with at least one of an outer-most articles of the articles of the group via an aperture 30 formed in the upper engaging member, a lower supporting member 12 supporting the bottoms of the articles of the group, wherein the upper engaging member is spaced apart from the lower supporting member such that the upper engaging member is connected to the lower supporting member by no part of the package but by the articles of the group (fig. 1-2).
Ogg discloses a carrying tray but fails to disclose supporting handles on the tray. Spivey teaches wherein the lower supporting member 364 comprises a plurality of carrying handles 373a,b ([0046]; fig. 6B). 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 lower tray of Ogg to include the handles of Spivey to assist in easily gripping and transporting the packaged assembly.
Claim 7: Ogg-Spivey discloses the package of claim 4 or 5 wherein the upper engaging member is spaced above all parts of the lower supporting member (Ogg; fig. 2).
Claim 8: Ogg-Spivey disclose the package of claim 4 or 5 wherein the upper engaging member has a footprint which is greater than the footprint of the group of articles and generally equal to or less than the footprint of the lower supporting member (Spivey; fig. 1, 4B).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3 and 9-21 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 10/09/205, with respect to claims 1-3 and 9-21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of those claims have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 10/09/2025 regarding claims 4-5 and 7-8 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the prior art fails to disclose “wherein the upper engagement member is in engagement with at least an outer-most articles of the articles of the group via an aperture formed in the upper engagement member”. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, an aperture is defined as opening, hole or gap. Prior art Ogg discloses a panel with apertures 30 for engaging the outer surfaces of the stored articles. This limitation is believed to be taught by the prior art. Applicant is advised to provide structural elements that, in addition to the aperture, differentiate from the opening or hole of Ogg.
The apertures of Spivey have been shown and listed in the specification as being on the tray portion 364 and not the top retainer portion 206. The combination with the lower tray portion of Ogg, provide the carrying handle configuration of the claimed invention. With the above arguments, the rejection is respectfully maintained.
Conclusion
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