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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. The claimed limitation “frangible connection means”, recited in claims 1 and 11 will be interpreted as the structure or its equivalent as disclosed in applicant specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-4 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartness (US 2008/0272013) in view of Barkeding (WO 2015/100442).
Claim 1
Hartness discloses a product packaging device (500) comprising at least a first, second, and third containers (502), each containing a product/beverage (see [0003]), grouped in order to form a pack (see figure 9B), each of the containers being provided with a label (defined by holders formed by films 528 and 530 including indicia) (see [0089]) which forms a sheath inside which the first, second, and third containers are received, wherein each holder including the label has at least one attachment face (defined by outer surface of each holder), and at least one receiving face (defined by interior surface of the holder that has contact with the containers), wherein the attachment face of the label of the first container is fixedly joined to the receiving face of the label of the second container by frangible connection means (540 defined by heat seal or adhesive) between the attachment face and the receiving face of the first container and the second container (see [0086] and [0081]), respectively, and wherein the attachment face of the label of the second container is fixedly joined to the receiving face of the label of the third container by frangible connection means between the attachment face and the receiving face of the second container and the third container, respectively (see figure 10). Hartness also discloses the packaging device comprises perforations (544) at the heat sealing portions (defined by frangible connection means 540) to provide separability between articles (see [0086]). Hartness further discloses the labels including are formed from heat shrink material, or any other recyclable material (see [0083] and [0084]). Hartness further disclose each of the containers are held within the labels by an adhesive (542) applied to the interior of the label (see figure 9A and [0087]). Hartness does not disclose the labels formed from cardboard, paper or molded cellulose. However, Barkeding discloses labels (defined by sleeves 5, 9, and 15) for holding a container (see figure 12) could be formed from any of paper or plastic material (see [0011]). The sleeves disclosed by Barkeding are considered as labels because it has a smooth surface for printing purposes (see [0028]). The labels disclosed by Barkeding comprises planar surfaces (defined by panels 7, 11, or 17) capable to provide mechanical interlock between adjacent containers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the labels of Hartness including paper material as taught by Barkeding since sleeves for holding containers made from recyclable paper material are well-known and nominal in the art and would perform the function of holding the containers equally well. After Hartness is modified by Barkeding, in which the holder/label include paper material, the attachment face and the receiving face will be planar and capable of forming a form-fitting engagement to provide a mechanical interlock between adjacent containers. The planar surfaces of the sleeves of Barkeding will be capable of forming form-fitting to provide mechanical interlock between adjacent containers. The examiner clarifies that the previously mentioned paragraph [0011] form Barkeding discloses the uses of combination of paper and plastic in the sleeves for holding the containers.
Claim 2
Hartness further discloses each of the first and second containers have a body/sides and top and a base/bottom of the hemispherical type which extends the body (see figure 9B). Hartness does not disclose each label extends as far as an end of the base opposite the body, or beyond the end, and forms a positioning plane for the first container and the second container. Barkeding discloses the labels extending as far as an end of the base opposite the body, or beyond the end (see figure 14), and forms a positioning plane (defined by bottom portion of the label pushed inward to form a support for the base of the container) for the first container and the second container (see [0036]). Barkeding discloses the label has a cut (40) for allowing folding of the bottom of the label to form the support for the container (see [0036]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the labels of Hartness having the label extending beyond the end of the containers and including a cut for folding the label as taught by Barkeding to form a support for the bottom of the container.
Claim 3
After Hartness is modified by Barkeding, the cut in combination with the free end of the label will have plurality of tongues extending from a bottom free end of the label which forms the positioning plane, the plurality of tongues being able to be folded onto each other in order to form a base wall of the label.
Claim 4
Hartness further discloses the frangible connection means between the attachment face and the receiving face comprise at least one line of adhesive or strip of adhesive (see [0086]).
Claim 6
Hartness as modified by Barkeding discloses the labels comprising a polygonal cross section. After Hartness is modified by Barkeding, each label will have a polygonal cross section.
Claim 7
Hartness further discloses each label has at least one internal wall adhesively bonded by adhesive (542) to the body of the container (see [0087] and figure 9A).
Claim 8
Hartness and Barkeding, both, discloses for each label the attachment face has a concave shape and the receiving face has convex shape (see figure 9a of Hartness and figure 4 of Barkeding). Hartness and Barkeding, both, shows the exterior surface of the labels having a concave shape, while the interior surface is convex in same fashion as disclosed in Applicant’s invention.
Claim 9
Hartness as modified by Barkeding discloses the frangible connection means between the attachment face and the receiving face are produced by means of form-fitting cooperation between the concave shape and the convex shape. After Hartness is modified by Barkeding, the planar surfaces formed by paper panels would form a shape which the labels enclosing the containers will cooperate to form a form-fitting between the convex and the concave shapes.
Claim 10
Hartness further discloses each label comprises at least one reinforcement rib/tail (522) which extends along an axis about which the label is wound (see figures 9A and 9B).
Claim 11
Hartness discloses a container (502) comprising a label (defined by portions of films 528 and 530 including indicia enclosing one of the represented containers 502) (see [0089]) which has at least one attachment face (defined by outer surface of each holder), and at least one receiving face (defined by interior surface of the holder that has contact with the containers), in order to form a product packaging device where the product packaging device comprises at least a first, second, and third containers (502), each containing a product/beverage (see [0003]), grouped in order to form a pack (see figure 9B), each of the containers being provided with a label (defined by holders formed by films 528 and 530 including indicia) (see [0089]) which forms a sheath inside which the first, second, and third containers are received, wherein each holder including the label has at least one attachment face (defined by outer surface of each holder), and at least one receiving face (defined by interior surface of the holder that has contact with the containers), wherein the attachment face of the label of the first container is fixedly joined to the receiving face of the label of the second container by frangible connection means (540 defined by heat seal or adhesive) between the attachment face and the receiving face of the first container and the second container (see [0086] and [0081]), respectively, and wherein the attachment face of the label of the second container is fixedly joined to the receiving face of the label of the third container by frangible connection means between the attachment face and the receiving face of the second container and the third container, respectively (see figure 10). Hartness also discloses the packaging device comprises perforations (544) at the heat sealing portions (defined by frangible connection means 540) to provide separability between articles (see [0086]). Hartness further discloses the labels including heat shrink material, or any other recyclable material (see [0083] and [0084]). Hartness further disclose each of the containers are held within the labels by an adhesive (542) applied to the interior of the label (see figure 9A and [0087]). Hartness does not disclose the labels formed from cardboard, paper or molded cellulose. However, Barkeding discloses labels (defined by sleeves 5, 9, and 15) for holding a container (see figure 12) could be formed from any of paper or plastic material (see [0011]). The sleeves disclosed by Barkeding are considered as labels because it has a smooth surface for printing purposes (see [0028]). The labels disclosed by Barkeding comprises planar surfaces (defined by panels 7, 11, or 17) capable to provide mechanical interlock between adjacent containers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the labels of Hartness including paper material as taught by Barkeding since sleeves for holding containers made from recyclable paper material are well-known and nominal in the art and would perform the function of holding the containers equally well. After Hartness is modified by Barkeding, in which the holder/label is formed from paper material, the attachment face and the receiving face will be planar and capable of forming a form-fitting engagement to provide a mechanical interlock between adjacent containers. The planar surfaces of the sleeves of Barkeding will be capable of forming form-fitting to provide mechanical interlock between adjacent containers. The examiner clarifies that the previously mentioned paragraph [0011] form Barkeding discloses the uses of combination of paper and plastic in the sleeves for holding the containers.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Hartness, paragraph [0089], discloses the package include labels, such as printed indicia in the containers of the packaging device, or the film of the packaging device could include a label for the article, and/or the holder could have a double duty as the label to meet labeling requirements. Barkeding discloses labels (defined by sleeves 5, 9, and 15) for holding a container (see figure 12) formed from paper, plastic material, or combination of materials (see [0011]). Therefore, considering that Barkeding discloses labels could be formed from combination of paper and plastic material, then the combination of the teachings of Hartness and Barkeding is still proper and valid. Regarding applicant’s argument that the claimed invention is directed through a fundamentally different approach, the examiner points out that Hartness discloses every single structural element recited in the claims, except for the limitation of the material for the label. However, the teachings of Barkeding discloses labels made from either paper, plastic, or combination is well-known in the art.
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 RAFAEL A. ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
RAFAEL A. ORTIZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3736
/RAFAEL A ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736