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) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank (US 8714407) in view of Shiraishi (US 5013173).
Regarding claim 1, Frank teaches a portable and slender cosmetic container comprising: a container body with an inner shell member (100) with an outer edge and having an inner wall (wall portion of 100) including an inner wall rear surface, with an outer shell member (200) with an outer edge, selectively removably coupled to the inner shell member (via 114, 116, 214, 216) and with an outer wall opposing the inner wall, of an elastically deformable material (each shell piece is deformable at hinges 104, 204), and including an outer wall rear surface, with a sidewall having two opposing sides defining a body width, with a bottom end, with an upper end opposing the bottom end, defining an upper enclosed aperture (318) disposed at the upper end of the container body and defined by the outer edges of the inner and outer shell members, defining a body length separating the bottom and upper ends, defining a body depth separating the outer and inner wall rear surfaces, and defining and enclosing a container cavity configured to house a cosmetic substance (in a deformable tube) therein and with the container cavity is fluidly coupled to the upper enclosed aperture, and with the inner wall operably configured to be depressed into the container cavity to force the cosmetic substance through the upper enclosed aperture (col. 4, ll. 3-7); and a cosmetic pouch (deformable tube) of a flexible polymeric material (deformable plastic, see col. 4, ll. 51-60), disposed within the container cavity, spanning from the bottom end to an upper opening of the cosmetic pouch terminating at the upper enclosed aperture of the container body (col. 5, 32-37), configured to house the cosmetic substance therein, and selectively removably coupled to at least one of the inner and outer shell members (col. 5, ll. 32-37), wherein the depression of the inner wall is operably configured contact the cosmetic pouch to force the cosmetic substance through cosmetic pouch (col. 4, ll. 3-7); and a cover (cap, see col. 5, ll. 50-51) selectively removably coupled to the upper end of the container body in a watertight configuration and covering the upper enclosed aperture.
Frank does not teach that the container body is of a slender configuration with the body length and the body depth of a dimension ratio of at least 5:1.
Shiraishi teaches a cosmetic container that is of a slender configuration with the body length and the body depth of a dimension ratio of at least 5:1 (body length of 8.0-9.0 cm and body depth of 0.3-1.0 cm, col. 3, ll. 25-29; this gives a ratio of 8:1 up to 30:1).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Frank such that the container body is of a slender configuration with the body length and the body depth of a dimension ratio of at least 5:1 as taught by Shiraishi for the purpose of enabling a user to store and carry the device in a similar manner as a credit card (Shiraishi col. 3, ll. 29-31).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 1, wherein: the inner and outer shell members are selectively removably coupled together (Frank, via 114, 116, 214, 216) around the outer edges thereon, wherein the outer shell member includes a flange (Frank, Fig. 2) radially extending from the outer edges thereon and defining a singular space thereon that is aligned with the upper enclosed aperture.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 1, wherein: the inner wall is of an elastically deformable material (Frank, polypropylene, col. 3, ll. 33-37).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 1, wherein: the slender configuration includes the body length and the body depth of a dimension ratio of at least 10:1 (Shiraishi, body length of 8.0-9.0 cm and body depth of 0.3-1.0 cm, col. 3, ll. 25-29; this gives a ratio of 8:1 up to 30:1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 1, further comprising: an applicator stem (Shiraishi, 8) disposed in the upper enclosed aperture, with a lower end defining a lower end opening disposed in the container cavity, and with an upper end defining an upper end opening disposed outside of the container cavity (Shiraishi, Fig. 2), wherein the inner wall is operably configured to be depressed into the container cavity to force the cosmetic substance through the applicator stem (Frank, col. 4, ll. 3-7), through the upper enclosed aperture, and out the upper end opening of the applicator stem, the cover operably configured to cover the applicator stem (Shiraishi, Fig. 1).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Frank with an applicator stem as taught by Shiraishi for the purpose of supplying the cosmetic to an applicator tip (Shiraishi, col. 3, ll. 45-52).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 5, further comprising: an applicator tip (7) selectively removably coupled to the upper end opening of the applicator stem and of a porous material configured to enable transportation of the cosmetic substance therethrough, the cover operably configured to cover the applicator tip (Shiraishi Fig. 1).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Frank with an applicator tip as taught by Shiraishi for the purpose of applying the cosmetic to a user (Shiraishi, col. 4, ll. 53-61).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 6, further comprising: the cosmetic pouch having the applicator stem coupled thereto, wherein the inner wall is operably configured to be depressed into the container cavity to force the cosmetic substance through the applicator stem, through the upper enclosed aperture, and out the upper end opening of the applicator stem (Frank, col. 4, ll. 3-7).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 7, wherein: the inner and outer shell members are selectively removably coupled together around the outer edges thereon (Frank, via 114, 116, 214, 216), wherein the outer shell member includes a flange radially extending from the outer edges thereon and defining a singular space thereon that is aligned with the upper enclosed aperture (Frank, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 1, further comprising: an internal flange (Frank 110, 210) radially extending into the container cavity from at least one of the inner wall and the outer wall and operably configured to retain the cosmetic substance therein.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 9, wherein the cosmetic pouch is retained by the internal flange (Frank, col. 4, ll. 29-32).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 10, further comprising: an applicator stem (Shiraishi 8) disposed in the upper enclosed aperture, coupled to the cosmetic pouch, with a lower end defining a lower end opening disposed in the container cavity, and with an upper end defining an upper end opening disposed outside of the container cavity (Shiraishi Fig. 2), wherein the inner wall is operably configured to be depressed into the container cavity and contact the cosmetic pouch to force the cosmetic substance through the applicator stem (Frank col. 4, ll. 3-7), through the upper enclosed aperture, and out the upper end opening of the applicator stem, the cover operably configured to cover the applicator stem (Shiraishi Fig. 1).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Frank with an applicator stem as taught by Shiraishi for the purpose of supplying the cosmetic to an applicator tip (Shiraishi, col. 3, ll. 45-52).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank and Shiraishi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fiocco (US 4669637).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 1, but does not teach: a portion of the sidewall located at the bottom end of the container body that is selectively removable from the container body to expose the container cavity.
Fiocco teaches a portion of a sidewall (3) located at the bottom end of the container body that is selectively removable from the container body to expose the container cavity (col. 2, ll. 23-26).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Frank with a portion of the sidewall located at the bottom end of the container body that is selectively removable from the container body to expose the container cavity as taught by Fiocco for the purpose of providing an alternate means of accessing the internal cavity (Fiocco col. 2, ll. 23-25).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank and Shiraishi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mittel, Jr (US 5405034).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Frank and Shiraishi teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 1, but does not teach: a sliding cover disposed on the upper end of the container body that is operably configured to slide along a translational track defined by a protuberance and to expose the upper enclosed aperture.
Mittel, Jr. teaches a sliding cover (400) disposed on the upper end of the container body that is operably configured to slide along a translational track (420) defined by a protuberance (424) and to expose the upper enclosed aperture.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Frank to include a sliding cover disposed on the upper end of the container body that is operably configured to slide along a translational track defined by a protuberance and to expose the upper enclosed aperture as taught by Mittel, Jr., wherein doing so would merely be a matter of simple substitution of one known cover for another with predictable results.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Frank, Shiraishi, and Mittel, Jr. teaches the cosmetic container according to claim 13, wherein the translational track of the sliding cover is about an x- and y- axis of the protuberance (Mittel, Jr. Fig. 18).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the Davidov reference have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the Davidov reference for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 BRADLEY S OLIVER whose telephone number is (571)270-3787. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7-3 ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571)270-3735. 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.
/BRADLEY S OLIVER/Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/DAVID P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754