DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-10, 14-16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roach (US 4,437,713) in view of Nishimura (US 2004/0055903).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Roach teaches kit comprising a box 28 for storing at least one packaging assembly, the at least one packaging assembly configured to receive a plurality of medical devices, the box comprising at least one storage space positioned within a tray 20, wherein the at least one storage space has a front side and a back side and wherein: the back side of the storage space comprises at least one opening 22 configured to receive one or more user's fingers and to allow the user to push the at least one packaging assembly stored in the box towards the front side of the box. Roach does not disclose a ramp on the front side of the tray enabling a packaging assembly stored in the box to slide up the ramp when pushed. Nishimura discloses a box 40 and tray 10 wherein the tray in configured with a ramp 34 at a front side of the tray to allow articles held therein to be pushed up the ramp into an accessible position outside the tray – see Figure 15. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a similar ramp structure at the front side of the tray to make it easier to remove items held within the tray.
Regarding claim 2, Roach teaches an internal member (one of elements 26; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Roach teaches the internal member is removable from the box (Fig.
1).
Regarding claim 5, the angle of the ramp is between 30 and 50 degrees – see Figure 15 of Nishimura showing the ramp having a lower section having an angle that can be defined as claimed.
Regarding claim 6, Roach teaches the box is sized to hold a plurality of ornaments (Fig. 2), so the examiner takes the position that the box is configured to store at least one medical device (in a compartment for an ornament) and at least one further item (in another compartment).
Regarding claim 7, Roach teaches the internal member is slidable with respect to the
box (it slides with the drawer relative to outer box 28, and can slide out of tray 20; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, internal members 26 can be placed within each tray 20 of box 28 such that a plurality of internal members are stored on top of each other (in the same manner the trays are on top of each other), wherein a medical device and accessory are capable of being stored within each of the internal members 26.
Regarding claim 9, Roach does not teach a dimension for the opening 22. The Office takes the position that this feature is not a patentably distinguishable feature over the prior art because mere changes in size, color, and shape over the prior art cannot be used to distinguish over the prior art (see the Manual of Patent Examining Procedures, Section 2144.04). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make a finger opening large enough for a finger.
Regarding claims 10 and 18, Roach teaches the opening is positioned in a second wall of
an internal member 50 (Fig. 3) and wherein the internal member further comprises at least one
opening positioned in a first wall of the internal member opposite the second wall, wherein the
opening in the first wall is configured to allow the item stored in the box to be at least partially
moved out of the box (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, the method steps as claimed would be satisfied in the normal operation of the modified Roach device as applied to claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, and 10, above.
Regarding claim 16, the box 28 has internal members 42/44.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection.
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 COREY NELSON SKURDAL whose telephone number is (571)272-9588. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-4pm EST.
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, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/COREY N SKURDAL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights