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 .
This Office Action acknowledges the applicant’s amendment filed on 7/29/2025. Claims 1 and 3-28 are pending in the application. Claims 2 is cancelled. Claims 26-28 are withdrawn from consideration.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6, 12-13 and 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by OGAWA US 2021/0159104 A1.
With regards to claim 1, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4; Para. 0068) discloses an article comprising: a substrate container 1 for holding one or more substrates or reticles, the substrate container having: a housing 10 including one or more sidewalls, a closed end, an open end 11, and an interior space defined by the one or more side walls and the closed end; and a door 20B configured to close the open end of the housing, the door including: a door body 21B having a seal coupling portion (below 212; shown above), the door body being formed of a door body polymer (Para.0041), and a seal member 210B integrally formed with the seal coupling portion of the door body, wherein the seal member 210B includes a connection portion (at 212) and a contact portion 211/710-1/710-2/710-3, the connection portion being formed with the seal coupling portion (below 212) of the door body 21B such that the connection portion and the seal coupling portion of the door body are connected with each other, the contact portion being configured to seal the open end when the door is in a closed position.
With regards to claim 3, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4) discloses the door body 21B polymer includes a thermoplastic. (Para. 0066)
With regards to claim 4, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4) discloses the door body polymer includes at least one material selected from the group consisting of polycarbonate, cyclic olefin, liquid crystal polymer, polypropylene, polyetherimides, polyketone, polyether sulfone (PES), polybutylene terephthalate, polysulfone (PSU, PSF), polyetherether ketone (PEEK), and polyether ketone (PEKK). (Para. 0041, 0066 and 0090)
With regards to claim 6, OGAWA discloses the connection portion interlocks with the seal coupling portion of the door body. (Para. 0068; with an adhesive)
With regards to claim 12, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4) discloses the connection portion (at 212; Para. 0067) is made of a first polymer different from the door body polymer (Para. 0066). (Para. 0066-0067)
With regards to claim 13, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4) discloses the first polymer includes polyether ether ketone, or a combination thereof. (Para. 0066)
With regards to claim 22, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4) discloses the connection portion (at 212 of 210B) and the contact portion 211 are made of the same polymer. (Para. 0066-0067)
With regards to claim 23, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4) discloses the container 1 is one of a front opening unified pod.
With regards to claim 24, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4) discloses the seal coupling portion (below 212) is located at a periphery of the door body 21B.
With regards to claim 25, OGAWA (Fig. 1 and 4) discloses the seal coupling portion (below 212) extends along an entire circumference of the periphery of the door body 21B.
Claim(s) 5, 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OGAWA US 2021/0159104 A1.
With regards to claim 5, it appears the seal member 210B of OGAWA is formed integrally with the door body by injection molding.
Alternatively, the product (sealing member) being formed integrally with the door body by injection molding encompassed in the claim would have been obvious in view of the apparatus of OGAWA, for the purpose providing an alternate way of forming the sealing member integrally to the door body.
In accordance to MPEP 2113, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight. Please note that even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product, i.e. seal member, does not depend on its method of production, i.e. injection molding. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Federal Circuit 1985).
With regards to claim 7, OGAWA (Fig. 4) discloses the claimed invention as stated above but it does not specifically disclose the connection portion of the seal member has an enlarged edge, the enlarged edge being configured to held by the seal coupling portion of the door body to form an interlocking connection, thereby preventing withdrawal of the connection portion from the seal coupling portion of the door body.
However, an alternative embodiment of OGAWA (Fig. 13) teaches that it was known in the art to have a container with a sealing member 70K have the connection portion 120K of the seal member has an enlarged edge, the enlarged edge being configured to be held by the seal coupling portion of the container (at 101K) to form an interlocking connection, thereby preventing withdrawal of the connection portion from the seal coupling portion of the container. (Para. 0137-0142)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sealing member in OGAWA (Fig. 4) by providing an enlarged connection portion as taught by OGAWA (Fig. 13) for the purposes of preventing the seal from falling out of the groove.
With regards to claim 10, OGAWA (Fig. 13) further teaches the enlarged edge (at 120K) of the connection portion of the seal member is joined to and formed around by the seal coupling portion of the door body. (Para. 0137- end of 0142)
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OGAWA US 2021/0159104 A1 in view of vom Stein US 2005/0205033 A1.
With regards to claim 8, OGAWA discloses the claimed invention as stated above but it does not specifically disclose the seal coupling portion includes a gap and a channel; when viewed in a cross section view, a width of gap of the seal coupling portion being smaller than a width of the channel.
However, vom Stein further teaches the seal coupling portion (around 32) includes a gap and a channel (shown in Fig. 2); when viewed in a cross section view, a width of gap of the seal coupling portion being smaller than a width of the channel. (Para. 0012)
The inventions of OGAWA and vom Stein are both drawn to the field of containers that are capable of holding items. Each container includes a container (base), a lid and a sealing mechanism that provides a tighter seal to the container and lid. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the seal coupling portion in OGAWA (Fig. 4) by providing the seal coupling portion with a gap and a channel and a width of the gap of the seal coupling portion being smaller than a width of the channel as taught by vom Stein for the purposes of providing an alternative forming of the seal coupling portion.
With regards to claim 9, vom Stein further teaches the connection portion includes a first polymer, the first polymer having a compressibility configured to prevent the enlarged edge of the connection portion from being compressed to a size equal to or smaller than the gap of the seal coupling portion formed into the door body so as to form the interlocking connection. (Para. 0012 and 0015)
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OGAWA US 2021/0159104 A1 in view of Babbs et al. US 2009/0129897 A1.
With regards to claim 11, OGAWA discloses the claimed invention (seal member with a contact portion) as stated above but it does not specifically disclose the contact portion includes a wiper-type gasket.
However, Babbs teaches that it was known in the art to have a container with a seal member with the contact portion includes a wiper-type gasket. (Para. 0053)
The inventions of OGAWA and Babbs are both drawn to the field of containers that are capable of holding items such as substrates. Each container includes a container (base), a lid and a sealing mechanism that provides a tighter seal to the container and lid. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the contact portion of the seal member in OGAWA (Fig. 4) by having the contact portion include a wiper-type gasket as taught by Babbs for the purposes of providing an alternative type of seal member and creates enough separation for the door to be released and removed.
Claim(s) 14-16 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OGAWA US 2021/0159104 A1 in view of Mellander US 8,419,021 B2.
With regards to claim 14, OGAWA discloses the claimed invention (seal member with a contact portion) as stated above but it does not specifically disclose the contact portion is made of a second polymer different from the first polymer and the door body polymer.
However, Mellander teaches that it was known in the art to have a seal member 10 with a contact portion 30 made of a second polymer different from a first polymer 32 and the door body polymer (cap 18). (Col 2:40-43 and 5:16-17)
The inventions of OGAWA and Mellander are both drawn to the field of containers that are capable of holding articles. Each container includes a container, a lid and a sealing mechanism that provides a tighter seal to the container and lid. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the contact portion of the seal member in OGAWA (Fig. 4) by having the contact portion made of a second polymer different from a first polymer 32 and the door body polymer as taught by Mellander for the purposes of providing a pressure type seal to the container.
With regards to claim 15, Mellander further teaches the second polymer (of 30) includes an elastomeric polymer. (Col 5:19-22)
With regards to claim 16, Mellander further teaches the second polymer (of 30) includes a thermoset or a thermoplastic elastomer. (Col 5:19-22)
With regards to claim 19, Mellander further teaches the second polymer (of 30) includes at least one material selected from the group consisting of fluoropolymer, fluoroelastomer (FKM). (Col 5:22-33)
With regards to claim 20, Mellander further teaches the first polymer has hardness and stiffness that are greater than those of the second polymer. (Col 5:34-45)
Claim(s) 17-18 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OGAWA US 2021/0159104 A1 in view of Mellander US 8,419,021 B2 supported by Balzer et al. US 2007/0179248 A1.
With regards to claim 17, OGAWA in view of Mellander discloses the claimed invention (first and second polymers) as stated above but it does not specifically disclose the second polymer includes a polymer that has a shore durometer not less than 30 shore.
Mellander recites the second polymer can be formed from fluoropolymer or fluoroelastomer (FKM). Balzer teaches (Para. 0029-0030) that it was known in the art that an article formed of fluoropolymer or fluoroelastomer (FKM) would have a shore durometer not less than 30 shore. (Table 5; Compound #25)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second polymer have a shore durometer not less than 30 shore as taught by Mellander for the purposes of providing an article with higher and stronger durability properties.
With regards to claim 18, Balzer further teaches that the second polymer is capable of withstanding a temperature of 130°C. (Para. 0029-0030; Table 5; Compound #25)
With regards to claim 21, the combination of OGAWA, Mellander and Balzer inherently discloses the first polymer is capable of withstanding any temperature for the second polymer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant states “Ogawa does not disclose "wherein the seal member includes a connection portion and a contact portion, the connection portion being formed with the seal coupling portion of the door body such that the connection portion and the seal coupling portion of the door body are connected with each other, the contact portion being configured to seal the open end when the door is in a closed position" as recited by claim 1.”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees, the connection portion of the seal member is formed (at 212) which is formed on the bottom portion of the seal shown in Fig. 4 and the contact portion of the seal member are (211/710-1/710-2/710-3). Ogawa recites in Para. 0047, that non-contact between the two structures are preferably low but it does not state that contact does not occur.
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 JENINE PAGAN whose telephone number is (313)446-4924. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm, Monday-Thursday.
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. Avilés 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.
/JENINE PAGAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
/ORLANDO E AVILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3736