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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 18, 2025 has been entered.
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, the intersecting point with the concave end wall to an edge of the circumferential wall that is opposite the intersecting point as recited in the newly amended claim 11 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The disclosure, as originally filed, does not disclose that the limitation “intersecting point” and “an edge of the circumferential wall” and the details of the “intersecting point” and “an edge of the circumferential wall” relative to the Applicant’s invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 11-13 and 15-25 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. The disclosure, as originally filed, does not disclose that the flow cup includes an intersecting point with the concave end wall to an edge of the circumferential wall that is opposite the intersecting point as recited in the newly amended claim 11. Clarification is respectfully requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 11, 12, 15-21 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anmelder (IDS DE102011008316).
With respect to claim 11, Anmelder discloses a flow cup (1. Figs. 1-3) for a spray gun (not shown), which has a material outlet (at 5) which is embodied for direct and/or indirect connection to a spray gun, the flow cup having a material container (2 and 8) which on at least one end side is closed by a disk-shaped end wall (of 8), a ventilation device (at 12) by way of which air can flow into the flow cup to enable pressure equalization when material flows out of the flow cup by way of (via) the material outlet, wherein the end wall is provided with a concavity (cover 8 forms as a shallow cup cover) which extends (horizontally) uniformly across the end wall and wherein the concave end wall adjoins a circumferential wall (of 2) of the flow cup at an angle of more than 90° (conical…sleeve ( 2 ). Claim 5), and wherein all of the circumferential wall extends linearly at a constant angle from an intersecting point (See enlarged Fig. 1 with additional annotations below) with the concave end wall to an edge of the circumferential wall that is opposite the intersecting point.
With respect to claim 12, Anmelder discloses wherein the location of the concave end wall which protrudes furthest inwards (towards 2) due to the concavity, has an offset (outer skirt of 8) relative to an outer peripheral region (above the intersecting point) of the end wall.
With respect to claim 15, Anmelder discloses wherein the circumferential wall (of 2) of the flow cup, proceeding (starts) from the end side that is closed by the concave end wall, widens conically (towards the connection portion (5) for a spray gun or an adaptor. Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 16, Anmelder discloses wherein a circumferential periphery (skirt of 8) is provided which projects outward (downward) in relation to the concave end wall.
With respect to claim 17, Anmelder discloses wherein the ventilation device comprises a closure element (9) which can be moved between at least one open (unsealed) position in which air can flow into the flow cup and a closed position (sealed) in which no air can flow through the ventilation device into the flow cup.
With respect to claim 18, Anmelder discloses wherein a movable closure element (9) of the ventilation device, in a closed (sealed) position in which no air can flow through the ventilation device into the flow cup, is set back in (inward) relation to a circumferential periphery (skirt of 8. Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 19, Anmelder discloses wherein a movable closure element (9) of the ventilation device in an open (unsealed) position, in which air can flow through the ventilation device into the flow cup, projects in relation to a circumferential periphery (skirt of 8. Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 20, Anmelder discloses wherein the concave end wall is releasably connected to the material container (Figs. 1-3).
With respect to claim 21, Anmelder discloses wherein the concavity of the end wall is a concave curvature toward the inside of the material container (Figs. 1-3).
With respect to claim 25, Anmelder discloses wherein the concave end wall, is part of a cover (lid 8) of the flow cup and is releasably connected to the material container (Figs. 1-3).
PNG
media_image1.png
170
529
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Anmelder.
With respect to claim 22, Anmelder discloses wherein the offset relative to the outer peripheral region of the end wall has a depth of 1 % to 4% of the diameter of the end wall (Fig. 1). Alternatively, a change in form or shape (the height of the outer peripheral region or the depth of the concavity) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a depth of 1 % to 4% of the diameter of the end wall, since the claimed values are merely an optimum or workable range. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anmelder in view of Kruse at el. (IDS. DE102015006483. Kruse hereinafter).
With respect to claim 13, Anmelder discloses the flow cup as in claim 11 except for wherein the ventilation device comprises an off-center ventilation opening through the concave end wall, which is disposed with an offset relative to the center of the end wall.
However, Kruse teaches a flow cup (302a. Fig. 11) for a spray gun (1) wherein the ventilation device comprises an off-center ventilation opening (36a) through the concave end wall (36), which is disposed with an offset relative to the center of the end wall.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of an off-center ventilation opening, as taught by Kruse, to Anmelder’s flow cup, in order to provide fastening, guiding and/or latching ([0076]). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the ventilation opening off-center in order to provide ventilation. It has been held that rearranging parts (relocating the ventilation opening) of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claim(s) 23 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anmelder.
With respect to claims 23-24, Anmelder discloses the flow cup as in claim 11 except for wherein the offset relative to the center of the end wall is more than 5% and less than 10% of the diameter of the end wall (claim 23) and wherein the circumferential wall of the flow cup widens conically such that the concave end wall adjoins the circumferential wall at an angle of more than 90° and less than 95° (claim 24).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a depth of 5% and less than 10% of the diameter of the end wall and an angle of more than 90° and less than 95°, since the claimed values are merely an optimum or workable range. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 11-13 and 15-25 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the reference and/or the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHEE-CHONG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am -5pm.
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, Arthur O. Hall can be reached on (571)270-1814. 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.
/CHEE-CHONG LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 August 18, 2025