DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application
Applicant’s arguments filed on February 13, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The previous claim objections, and 112 rejections have been withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments. Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11, 13, 19 and 20 have been amended. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application with claims 16-18 withdrawn from consideration.
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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 18, “sealing” should be --sealed--.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 5, “arranged located” should be --arranged--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foushee (US 6,070,792 A) in view of Santangelo (US 5,950,916 A).
Regarding claim 1, Foushee teaches a storage device comprising:
a storage body (110, 120, 102); a first folding flap (130); and a first security mechanism (134, 140),
wherein the storage body includes a first plate and a second plate (110, 120) that are connected to each other, and the first plate and the second plate can be folded along a folding line (124) to form a storage chamber (102), and when the first and second plates are folded along the folding line, the storage body has the storage chamber with a storage opening,
wherein the first folding flap is connected with the first plate, and the first folding flap is used to turn around and overlap onto a surface of the second plate according to a first setting axis (116) relative to the first plate to seal the storage opening, or the first folding flap is used for turning around the first setting axis relative to the first plate, so as to insert into the storage chamber through the storage opening (FIG. 1),
wherein the first security mechanism is used for connecting the first folding flap and the second plate when the first folding flap is overlapped onto the surface of the second plate, so that the storage opening is sealed; or by disconnecting the first folding flap and the second plate so that the storage opening can be opened (FIG. 1-3),
wherein the second plate is provided with a second security mechanism (174, 176) and upon insertion of the first folding flap into the storage chamber, the second security mechanism can connect the second plate and the first folding flap to seal the storage opening; or when the first folding flap folds over the second plate to seal the storage opening the second security mechanism is used for connecting part of the first plate adjacent to the storage opening and part of the second plate adjacent to the storage opening (column 3 line 53-column 6 line 45 and FIG. 1-8).
Foushee fails to teach the first security mechanism being plural groups of the first security mechanism, wherein the plural groups of the first security mechanism are arranged in sequence in a direction away from the first setting axis. Santangelo teaches an analogous storage device comprising a storage body (10), a first folding flap (12) and a first security mechanism (16, 18, 20). Santangelo further teaches that it is known and desirable to provide plural groups of the first security mechanism arranged in sequence in a direction away form a first setting axis so that storage device can be repeatedly opened and closed (abstract, column 2 line 55-column 4 line 43 and FIG. 1-4).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Foushee by alternatively configuring the first security mechanism to comprise plural groups of the first security mechanism, wherein the plural groups of the first security mechanism are arranged in sequence in a direction away from the first setting axis, as taught by Santangelo, so that the storage device can be repeatedly opened and closed via the first security mechanism more than once.
Regarding claim 2, Foushee as modified by Santangelo teaches the storage device of claim 1 above, wherein the plural groups of first security mechanism comprises a first self-adhesive component (Foushee: 138 and Santangelo: 18) and a first safety inspection portion (Foushee: 134 and Santangelo: 20); the first self-adhesive component is set up on the first folding flap or the second plate (Foushee: FIG. 1 and Santangelo: FIG. 1); the first safety inspection portion is arranged on the first folding flap (Foushee: FIG. 1 and Santangelo: FIG. 1); the first self-adhesive component is used to connect the first folding flap and the second plate for sealing the storage opening upon the first folding flap overlapping onto the surface of the second plate (Foushee: FIG. 1-2 and Santangelo: FIG. 1, 3); the first safety inspection portion is used to disconnect the first folding flap and the second plate, so that the storage opening can be opened (Foushee: FIG. 1-3 and Santangelo: FIG. 3); and the first self-adhesive component and the first safety inspection portion are arranged in sequence along a preset direction in which the preset direction and the first setting axis is set at an angle (Foushee: FIG. 1 and Santangelo: FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Foushee as modified by Santangelo teaches the storage device of claim 2 above, wherein the first security mechanism further comprises a force applying portion (Foushee: left or right terminal gripping portion of 134), which locates next to the first safety inspection portion, by applying an external force to the force applying portion that can disconnect the first folding flap from the second plate (Foushee: FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 5, Foushee as modified by Santangelo teaches the storage device of claim 1 above, wherein the second security mechanism comprises a second self-adhesive component (Foushee: 174) and a second safety inspection portion (Foushee: 176), and the second self-adhesive component and the second safety inspection portion is located on the second plate (Foushee: FIG. 1, 3, 4), and the second self-adhesive component is to connect the second plate and the first folding flap upon inserting the first folding flap into the storage chamber, so that the storage opening is sealed, or to connect the first plate adjacent to the storage opening and the second plate adjacent to the storage opening, that the storage opening is sealed (Foushee: FIG. 5-6), wherein the second safety inspection portion is used for disconnecting the second plate from the first folding flap that extends into the storage chamber, so that the storage opening can be opened, or the second safety inspection portion is used to disconnect the connection between the first plate adjacent to the storage opening and the second plate adjacent to the storage opening, so that the storage opening can be opened (Foushee: FIG. 6-7), and wherein the second self-adhesive component and the second safety inspection portion are arranged in sequence along a preset direction in which the preset direction and the first setting axis are set at an angle (Foushee: FIG. 1, 3, 4).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foushee in view of Santangelo, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Siebold (DE 200 16 851 U1).
Regarding claim 4, Foushee as modified by Santangelo teaches the storage device of claim 1 above, but fails to teach the storage device further comprising a plug-in component, which has a slot and a latch that are mated with each other, wherein either the slot or the latch is set on the at least one first security mechanism, and the other of the slot of the latch is set on the second plate.
Siebold teaches an analogous storage device comprising a storage body including first and second plates (Fig. 1), a first folding flap (2), and at least one first security mechanism on the first folding flap including a first self-adhesive component (8) (Translation: “optionally, the self-adhesive layer with the protective cover can also be applied to the inside of the closure flap 2”). Siebold further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to additionally provide the storage device with a plug-in component, which has a slot (4) and a latch (3) that are mated with each other, wherein either the slot or the latch is set on the at least one first security mechanism, and the other of the slot of the latch is set on the second plate, so that the storage device can be optionally reused as often as desired (Translation and Fig. 1).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Foushee by additionally providing a plug-in component, which has a slot and a latch that are mated with each other, wherein either the slot or the latch is set on the at least one first security mechanism, and the other of the slot of the latch is set on the second plate, as taught by Siebold, so that the storage device can be optionally reused as often as desired.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foushee in view of Santangelo, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Smythe (US 2011/0153527 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Foushee as modified by Santangelo teaches the storage device of claim 1 above, but fails to teach the storage device further comprising a first digital code, which is on at least one of the first plate and the second plate, and the first digital code which comprises at least one of a machine-readable optical label component and a radio frequency chip.
Smythe teaches a storage device comprising a storage body including first and second plates (2, 3), a first folding flap (5), and at least one security mechanism on the first folding flap including a self-adhesive component (21) and a safety inspection portion (9). Smythe further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide the safety inspection portion with a digital code (55) comprising a machine-readable optical label for providing information such as address information (paragraph 46 and Fig. 6).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Foushee by additionally providing the storage device with a first digital code comprising a machine-readable optical label component on at least the second security mechanism on the second plate, as taught by Smythe, in order to provide the storage device with information pertaining to the contents of the storage device when the second security mechanism is in use.
Regarding claim 7, Foushee as modified by Santangelo and Smythe teaches the storage device of claim 6 above, wherein the first digital code comprises the machine-readable optical label component, which is set up on the second plate, and the quantity of the machine-readable optical label component is the same as the quantity of the first security mechanism, and when the first folding flap is overlapped with the second plate, the at least one first security mechanism and the machine-readable optical label component are set in one-to-one correspondence (Smythe: paragraph 46 and Fig. 6).
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foushee in view of Santangelo, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of de Lyra (US 3,963,174 A, hereinafter Lyra).
Regarding claim 11, Foushee as modified by Santangelo teaches the storage device of claim 1 above, but fails to teach the storage device further comprising external hardware, which comprises a third plate and a fourth plate that connect to each other, the third plate can be connected to either the first plate or the second plate, and the fourth plate can be flipped around the third setting axis relative to the third plate to overlap on the surfaces of the unconnected first plate or the second plate to seal or open the storage opening.
Lyra teaches a storage device including first and second plates and further that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide a storage device with external hardware (12) configured to repeatedly reseal the storage device, wherein the external hardware comprises a third plate (38) and a fourth plate (40) that connect to each other, wherein the third plate is configured to be connected to either the first plate or the second plate and wherein the fourth plate is configured to be flipped around a third axis setting relative to the third plate to overlap on the surface of the other of the first plate or the second plate to seal the storage opening (column 2 line 11-column 3 line 56 and Fig. 1-4).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Foushee by additionally providing the storage device with external hardware comprising a third plate and a fourth plate that connect to each other, wherein the third plate is configured to be connected to either the first plate or the second plate, and the fourth plate is configured to be flipped around the third setting axis relative to the third plate to overlap on the surfaces of the other of the first plate or the second plate to seal or open the storage opening, as taught by Lyra, in order to provide a means for additionally and repeatedly resealing the storage device.
Regarding claim 12, Foushee as modified by Santangelo and Lyra teaches the storage device of claim 11 above, wherein the fourth plate is provided with a fourth security mechanism (54), which is used to connect the first plate or the second plate with the fourth plate (Lyra: column 2 lines 52-58 and Fig. 1, 4).
Regarding claim 13, Foushee as modified by Santangelo and Lyra teaches the storage device of claim 12 above, wherein the fourth plate is provided with a fourth security mechanism comprising a fourth self-adhesive component (54, 154) and a fourth safety inspection portion (56/58, 156/158) located on the fourth plate, wherein the fourth self-adhesive component is to seal up the storage opening upon connecting the fourth plate by overlapping onto the surface of the first plate or the second plate to seal the storage opening; the fourth safety inspection portion is used to disconnect the connection between the first plate or the second plate that overlapped by the fourth plate, so that the storage opening can be opened, and wherein the fourth self-adhesive component and the fourth safety inspection portion are arranged in sequence along a preset direction in which the preset direction and the third setting axis are set at an angle (Lyra: Fig. 1, 4).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foushee in view of Santangelo and Lyra, as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Smythe.
Regarding claim 14, Foushee as modified by Santangelo and Lyra teaches the storage device of claim 11 above, but fails to teach the external hardware further comprising a second digital code, which is set up on at least either one of the third plate or the fourth plate.
Smythe teaches an analogous security mechanism including a self-adhesive component (21) and a safety inspection portion (9). Smythe further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to provide the safety inspection portion with a digital code (55) comprising a machine-readable optical label for providing information such as address information (paragraph 46 and Fig. 6).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Foushee as modified by Lyra by additionally providing the external hardware with a second digital code, which is set up on at least either one of the third plate or the fourth plate, as suggested by Smythe, in order to provide the external hardware with additional information pertaining to the contents of the storage device when the external hardware is in use.
Regarding claim 15, Foushee as modified by Santangelo, Lyra and Smythe teaches the storage device of claim 14 above, wherein the second digital code comprises at least one of a machine-readable optical label component and a radio frequency chip (Smythe: paragraph 46 and Fig. 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 9, 10, 19 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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 NINA KAY ATTEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3972. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-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.
/NINA K ATTEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3734
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights