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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 10/28/2025 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: “As shown in FIGS. 1, 3 and 4, panels 34, 36, 38, 40 each define a planar surface that extends continuously from top 22 to bottom 24; the planar surfaces of panels 38, 40 each extend into the planar surfaces of panels 36, 38. As also shown in FIGS. 1, 3 and 4,recess 42 of corner 26 and recess 42 of corner 28 each extend into the planar surface of panel 38; and recess 42 of corner 30 and recess 42 of corner 32 each extend into the planar surface of panel 40.” None of the panels are planar from top to bottom, each panel is rounded where it meets the top and bottom. Panels 38 and 40 are shown as being the center of each side and do not extend to the top and bottom but are recessed between a portion above 38/40 and a portion below 38/40 and thusly are not planar surfaces extending continuously from top to bottom. Panels 38 and 40 do not extent into 36 and 38 but into the corner portions between each side panel. The recesses 42 are shown as being in the corner portions and not into the side panels. Further it is unclear what “into” is referring to, laterally or towards the center of the container.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claims 61-80 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, four sides with a planar surface continuing from the top to the bottom, sides extending into each other and the second portion of the first recess facing the second portion of the second recess; and the first portion of the first recess facing the first portion of the fourth recess must be shown.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 61-80 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 61, 78 and 79 recite “the sides each including a planar surface that extends continuously from the top to the bottom”, this is not shown in the figures and is not described as such in the specification. As stated above the sides are not planar as they are rounded where they meet the top and bottom portion and panels 38 and 40 are shown as recessed into the side and as such do not have a planar surface that extends from the top to bottom.
Claims 61, 78 and 79 recite “the planar surfaces of the third and fourth sides each extending into the planar surfaces of the first and second side”, each side of the container is shown and meeting the corners and as such does not extend in any fashion into another side.
Claims not specifically mentioned are included due to their dependencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 61-80 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 60, 78 and 79 recite “the planar surfaces of the third and fourth sides each extending into the planar surfaces of the first and second side”, this is unclear. How do they extend into each other? Are they overlapping? Do they extend towards each other? Are the edges shaped to fit together like puzzle pieces and would extend into the opening of the adjacent one? Doesn’t each side extend to the corner portion? This is unclear.
Claim 60, 78 and 79 recite “the sides each including a planar surface that extends continuously from the top to the bottom, the planar surfaces of the third and fourth sides each extending into the planar surfaces of the first and second sides, the planar surface of the third side defining spaced apart first and second recesses, the planar surface of the fourth side defining spaced apart third and fourth recesses”, this is unclear. Does the applicant mean each side has a planar portion? Or a portion that is planar? If a side has a recess that it is by definition no longer planar, as there are portion on more than one plane and would instead be only partially planar.
Claim 60, 78 and 79 recite “each of the recesses including a first portion and a second portion that is merged with the first portion to define a concave configuration”, this is unclear. How is the first portion merged with itself?
Claim 69 recites “wherein the concave configuration is defined in a cross-sectional plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis”, this is unclear. Is the frame of reference the interior of the container or the exterior of the container?
Claim 73 recites “wherein the body comprises four spaced apart axial corners, each of the recesses being disposed in one of the corners”, this is unclear. Claim 61 recites the recesses are in a side, are these additional recesses? Or should claim 61 instead recite the recesses are in a respective corner and not in a side?
Claim 77 recites “the second portion of the first recess faces the second portion of the second recess; and the first portion of the first recess faces the first portion of the fourth recess”, this is unclear. If the recesses are concave then each portion faces outward from the corner as shown in Fig. 1. Does the applicant mean the second portion of the first recess is parallel to the second portion of the second recess? Or the second portion of the first recess on the interior of the container faces the second portion of the second recess?
Due to the lack of clarity of the claims and lack of support in the specification as originally filed it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claims are and if they are directed to the disclosed embodiment.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claim(s) 41-60 are withdrawn as a result of the amendment. Those claims not specifically mentioned are rejected based upon their dependency on a rejected claim from which they depend.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 51-60 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
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 Lauren Kmet whose telephone number is (313)446-4834. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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.
/L KMET/ Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735