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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant amendment received on 10/08/2025:
Amendments of Claims 1, 3 and 4 are acknowledged.
Cancelation of Claims 2 and 8 to 14 is acknowledged.
New Claim 15 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/08/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On pages 10 and 11 of the Specification (Paragraphs 0064, 0065, and 0073 to 0076 of the PGPub) it is indicated that Figure 1 is a schematic representation of a mould assembly and Figure 2 is a schematic representation of a method according to an embodiment of the first aspect of the invention, while in reality Figure 1 is a schematic representation of the method and Figure 2 is a schematic representation of a mould assembly.
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 to 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fattori (US 5496122).
Regarding Claim 1:
Fattori discloses a method of manufacturing a solid formulation product (Figure 1, solid stick product 1) comprising steps of:
positioning a platform into a cup comprising an open end comprising a skirt, such that the platform is at least partially received by the cup; then filing the cup with liquid formulation to a predetermined level such that the platform is at least partially submerged in the liquid formulation (Figure 1, Abstract, retaining member 7, considered the platform, is partially received by the cap or cover 3, considered the cup, the not numbered skirt will be considered the section of the cover 3 below the uppermost point of retaining member 7, about the place where the numeral 3 is shown on Figure 1; molten product is filled through a fill hole 13 in the retaining member 7 into a cavity 27 defined between the retaining member 7 and cover 3);
solidifying the liquid formulation in the cup to form a solid formulation (Claim 1, cooling the molten product so as to form the solid stick product), and
wherein the skirt is oval-shaped or obround-shaped in cross-section (Figure 4 shows the cover 3 being ovel shaped).
Fattori discloses (Abstract) that the cap 3 can be easily removed and replaced on the product, and that can be retained on the external periphery 29 of the retaining member (that will be called external periphery of the retaining member 29) by a friction fit, or corresponding grooves and projections on the cover and retaining member to provide a snap-fit attachment of the cover on the retaining member (Column 6, lines 60 to 63) but does not specifically disclose that deforming the skirt comprises deforming then releasing the skirt or in particular compressing the skirt along a compressible axis comprises radially compressing the skirt such that a maximum diameter of the cross-sectional shape is reduced.
Since the cap 3 of Fattori does not disclose having a handle in particular to grab the cap, the cap needs to be grabbed by the user by the skirt to remove it from the external periphery of the retaining member 29 to use the solid stick product; once the cover is removed the skirt can be released when putting away the cover or when installing it back in place.
The annotated Figure 1 bellow show the approximate plane AA where the user would have to grab the cap 3.
PNG
media_image1.png
609
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Below is a view from the plane AA where the cap 3 and the external periphery of the retaining member 29, the cap 3 is represented on a dotted line, the external periphery of the retaining member 29 in a solid line and the two axis of the oval on segmented lines.
PNG
media_image2.png
430
663
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As indicated by Fattori, the cover 3 is attached to the external periphery of the retaining member 29 by a snap fit or a compression fit, a force needs to be applied to the cover by the user to separate the fit. Given that the cap is oval, the practical ways to apply such a force would be to grasp the cover 2 with two fingers either on the widest or in the narrowest part of the skirt; and given the limited number of choices it can be considered as “Choosing From a Finite Number of Identified, Predictable Solutions, With a Reasonable Expectation of Success”, so it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to compress the skirt along a compressible axis across the widest part of the skirt, such that a maximum diameter of the cross-sectional shape is reduced as one of a limited number of predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success for removing the cap from the retaining member 29; also note that no criticality seems to be given to this limitation and the cap would eventually open regardless it is grasped on the widest or in the narrowest part of the skirt.
Also, below is a representation of the effect of applying a force F for radially compressing the skirt across the widest part of the skirt; note that the maximum diameter of the cross-sectional shape is reduced.
PNG
media_image3.png
426
658
media_image3.png
Greyscale
While the maximum diameter of the cross-sectional shape is reduced the minimum diameter of the cross-sectional shape increases, separating the wall of the cap 3 from the external periphery of the retaining member 29, which will result of liberation from any compression fit or dislodging any snap-fit between the wall of the cap 3 and the external periphery of the retaining member 29 on the widest part of the skirt; note that several references on the record teach placing snap-fit connections on the widest part of the skirt on similar caps, making it advantageous to apply pressure along the maximum diameter of the cross-sectional shape.
Pressing the cover 3 would of course deform the skirt in the direction the fingers are pressing, represented as force F, that can be considered a compressible axis of the squirt, while at the same time causing an expansion in an axis perpendicular to the compressible axis of the squirt, that can be considered an expandible axis of the skirt, and loosen the fit and remove the cover from the solid stick product 1. Once the cover is removed the skirt can be released when putting away the cover or when installing it back in place.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for once the solid formulation is formed, deforming then releasing the skirt, wherein deforming the skirt comprises compression of the skirt along a compressible axis of the skirt corresponding to the maximum diameter of the cross-sectional shape, which causes expansion of the skirt along an expandible axis of the skirt corresponding to the minimum diameter of the cross-sectional shape, which is substantially normal to the compressible axis of the skirt, to relieve any compression fit or dislodging any snap-fit between the wall of the cap and the retaining member on the widest part of the skirt; making it easier to remove the cap from the retaining member, also selecting to compress the skirt along a compressible axis across the widest part of the skirt would be just choosing from a limited number of predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success for removing the cap from the external periphery of the retaining member 29; note that no criticality seems to be given to this limitation and the cap would eventually open regardless it is grasped on the widest or in the narrowest part of the skirt; and also, compressing the skirt by the maximum diameter of the cross-sectional shape is a common way to remove the cover to use or inspect the solid formulation product.
Regarding Claim 3:
Fattori discloses that the platform comprises a retaining structure: and the step of filing the cup with liquid formulation to a predetermined level comprises filling the cup such that the retaining structure is fully submerged in the liquid formulation (Figure 1, retaining member 7 includes retention wells 11, Column 6, lines 64 to 67, retaining member 7 includes retention wells 11, that will be considered the retaining structure, the cover and retaining member form therebetween a cavity 27 which is filled with product. The product extends into the retention wells 11, so as to anchor the product on the retaining member and to avoid dislodging of the product from the retaining member, Column 8, lines 28 to 30, air trapped in the retention wells 11 can easily flow through the vent channels 9 so as to be removed from the retention wells).
Regarding Claim 4:
Fattori discloses that the platform comprises an attachment element and the step of filing the cup with liquid formulation to a predetermined level comprises filling the cup such that the attachment element is not submerged in the liquid formulation (Figure 1, Column 9, lines 10 to 12, Filling is completed when the product fill height reaches the bottom surface of the retention wells 11; Figure 1, Column 9, lines 13 to 15, snap-fit location 15 will be considered an attachment element and surely it is not submerged).
Regarding Claim 5:
Fattori discloses a subsequent step of attaching a reusable holder to the attachment element (Figure 1, Column 9, lines 13 to 15, snap-fit location 15 will be considered an attachment element, and after the product has cooled and solidified, the handle 17 can be snap-fit assembled into the retaining member 7 at snap-fit location 15).
Regarding Claim 6:
Fattori discloses that the liquid formulation is molten and is solidified by cooling to below its melting point (Column 9, lines 5 to 14, Hot, liquified product is then filled through the fill hole 13 of the retaining member 7… After the product has cooled and solidified, meaning that it was cooled to below the melting point).
Regarding Claim 7:
Fattori discloses attaching a lid to the cup (Short of any additional limitation, handle 17 can be considered a lid attached to the cover 3 by means of the retaining member 7).
Regarding Claim 15:
Fattori discloses that the skirt is shaped such that, when the platform is received within the cup, a space is defined between the platform and the skirt (Figure 2, cover 3 is being considered the cup with an open end retained at external periphery of the retaining member 29, that is the external periphery of member 7, considered the platform, and a space is defined between the platform and the skirt at the curved top end of retaining member 7 as can be seen below).
PNG
media_image4.png
327
252
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Since Claims 8 to 14 were canceled, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102 are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 10/08/2025 regarding the rejection of Claims 1 to 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, as allegedly unpatentable over Fattori (US 5496122) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that “that the cover and the skirt are each different and distinct features”. The Examiner notes that claim 1 reads “a cup comprising an open end comprising a skirt”; so nowhere in the claim they are distinct features and the skirt is being claimed as part of the cup, that in Fattori is considered the cover 3 and the Examiner also explained how the open end of cover 3 comprises the skirt.
The Applicant also argues that Fattori does not disclose “the method may comprise a further subsequent step of attaching a lid to the cup”. The Examiner also disagrees, no additional limitations are given to the lid, so surely as mentioned in the office action, handle 17 can be considered a lid attached to the cover 3 by means of the retaining member 7. Note that Claim 7 is dependent of Claim 1, so the reusable holder is not claimed yet.
Applicant argues that, “in Fattori, the cap is removed using axial force. In other words, it is pulled upwards, with the force being applied on the cap, rather than a skirt surrounding a solid formulation. In doing so, there is no need for a consumer and/or one of ordinary skill in the art to press the cover to retain grasp."
And also: “Fattori teaches that a cover which would be easily released from the retaining member, thereby rendering it unnecessary to apply force sufficient to "deform the skirt in the direction the fingers are pressing”.
The Examiner was not able to find in Fattori any mention of an axial force to remove the cap. In any way, to pull the cap upwards still the cap needs to be retained and compressed to retain grasp of the cap and a force applied to separate the friction or snap-fit of the cap from the retaining member 29, if the user does not grasp the cover, it is impossible to apply any axial force to separate it from the retaining member. Fattori does not disclose the cap including any handle to prevent the user to having to press the skirt of the cover to release it. The Examiner is presenting additional figures to explain how the force applied would deform the cover and release the attachment of the cover to the retaining member.
The Applicant seems to argue that the “resilient plastic material” would not be really resilient at normal temperatures. The Argument is not really clear, if the material were not resilient then a snap-fit or a compression fit would be impossible. Anyway, the pending claims do not include any mention of the material of the packaging components.
New Claim 15 mentions a “space being defined between the platform and the skirt”; that the Examiner considers that may be referencing space 19 defined between the platform 20 and the skirt 18 and shown in FIGS. 7 and 8. Beyond the mention of the “space” no further limitation is given to it so the Examiner rejected it as can be read in the office action; but, in the opinion of the Examiner, a better description of the space 19 and skirt 18 in the claims would most likely overcome any reference on the record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure; in particular:
Jacob (US 6688795), Aurora (US 2013/0193167) and Facer (US 10039366) teach a subsequent step of placing a lid to the cup.
CHO JUNG SUK (KR 20200080526), Harlan (US 5505041), Baudin (WO 2023041536) and Ramet (EP 1428455) teach relevant caps including snap-fit on the narrow sides of the caps that would require compression of the skirt along a compressible axis comprises radially compressing the skirt such that a maximum diameter of the cross-sectional shape is reduced to release the snap-fit.
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 EDUARDO R FERRERO whose telephone number is (571)272-9946. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-7:00.
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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
/EDUARDO R FERRERO/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731