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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Landis (US-3317087-A) in view of Sedlak (US-3815736-A).
Landis discloses:
1. A paint container adapter (12), comprising: a cylindrical outer rim (17) and a continuous inner ledge (19), the continuous inner ledge protruding inwardly towards a center of the paint container adapter from the cylindrical outer rim (Fig. 3) to define a lower section of the paint container adapter and an upper section of the paint container adapter (Fig. 4), wherein the lower section of the paint container adapter is configured to fit over a periphery of an open upper end of a lower paint container that faces upwardly, and the upper section of the paint container adapter is configured to fit under a periphery of an open end of an upper paint container that is inverted to face downwardly (col. 1, lines 55-71); wherein the upper section of the paint container adapter comprises a first continuous flat surface (upper surface of 20) for an entire length and an entire circumference of the upper section (Figs. 3, 4) that is configured to abut an outer surface of the upper paint container (the structure is capable of this use based on the container), and the lower section of the paint container adapter comprises a second continuous flat surface (lower surface of 21) for an entire length and an entire circumference of the lower section (Figs. 3, 4) that is configured to abut an outer surface of the lower paint container (the structure is capable of this use based on the container); and wherein the paint container adapter, the lower paint container, and the upper paint container define an interior space configured to store a paint applicator (the structure of 20, 21 and 18 allows for this), and the paint container adapter is configured to seal the periphery of the open upper end of the lower paint container and the periphery of the open end of the upper paint container to inhibit escape of any vapor within the interior space (col. 1, ll. 55 – col. 2, ll. 34).
Landis fails to teach a first continuously vertical flat surface extending from the continuous inner ledge to a top edge of the upper section of the paint container adapter and a second continuously vertical flat surface extending from the continuous inner ledge to a bottom edge of the lower section of the paint container adapter.
Sedlak teaches that it is known in the art to manufacture a securing bump (22) in the form of a plurality of equally spaced bumps (30) in order to secure a member to the flange of a container (col. 4, II. 60 - col. 5, II. 4) such that a continuously flat surface extending between edges is formed between the bumps (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have manufactured the adapter with circular bumps in the place of the bumps (Landis, 20, 21) in order to use less material and since such a modification would be a simple substitution of known flange connection structures to attach a component to a container. The modified structure would have the claimed flat vertical surfaces since Landis teaches how to incorporate spaced connections structures into the adapter (See Figs. 9 and 10).
2. The paint container adapter of claim 1, wherein the paint container adapter comprises a circular cylindrical ring (Landis, Fig. 3).
3. The paint container adapter of claim 1, wherein the paint container adapter comprises a circular cylindrical rim and an annular inner ledge (Landis, Fig 3).
9. The paint container adapter of claim 1, wherein the paint applicator comprises a paint roller (the applicator is drawn to the use of the adapter and the adaptor is still capable of this intended use).
10. The paint container adapter of claim 1, wherein the lower section of the paint container adapter is configured to fit over a bead that extends around the periphery of the open upper end of the lower paint container, and the upper section of the paint container adapter is configured to fit under a bead that extends around the periphery of the open end of the upper paint container (Landis, col. 1, ll. 55 – col. 2, ll. 34).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) 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
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 JEFFREY R ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7426. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday.
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 at (571)270-5055. 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.
/JEFFREY R ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
