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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/04/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 3-16, 50 and 52-68 are presented for examination
This action is Non-Final
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1, 4-8, 50-51 and 53-57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tye et al. (2020/0047975) in view of Baker er al. (US 2013/0327819).
Claims 1, 50. Tye discloses a tray 3 for holding one or more food products, the tray comprising:
a plurality of panels comprising a central panel 11, at least one attachment panel 37 in at least partial face-to-face contact with a portion of the central panel (fig. 1), at least one side panel 21 foldably connected to a respective panel of the plurality of panels, at least one end panel 13 foldably connected to a respective panel of the plurality of panels, and at least one bottom panel 29 foldably connected to a respective panel of the plurality of panels [0034-0035], the at least one side panel intersecting the at least one end panel to at least partially form a sidewall of the tray extending around an interior of the tray (fig. 2, 4), the at least one bottom panel at least partially forming a bottom wall of the tray (fig. 4).
Tye discloses a liner partially attached to the flange and bottom interior of the tray [0032] but fails to disclose engaging features for supporting another tray. Baker teaches tray 102 engaging features comprising at least one notch defined within the central panel for at least partially supporting another tray in the interior of the tray (fig. 9); and
PNG
media_image1.png
210
378
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a second tray 152 at least partially supported in the interior of the first tray by the tray engaging features (fig. 8). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the flange of Tye to include the engaging features of Baker to assist in both venting the lower tray and supporting the position of the upper tray (fig. 8).
Claims 4, 53. Tye-Baker discloses the tray of claim 2, wherein the at least one attachment panel is capable of being exposed along the at least one notch for at least partially supporting another tray (Tye; fig. 1-2).
Claims 5, 54. Tye-Baker discloses the tray of claim 4, wherein the at least one notch is a first notch and the tray engaging features further comprise a second notch at least partially defined along an interior edge of the central panel opposite the first notch (Baker; fig. 9).
Claims 6, 55. Tye-Baker disclose the tray of claim 4, wherein the central panel at least partially extends around an opening, the at least one end panel is foldably connected to the central panel at a first fold line extending along the opening, the at least one attachment panel is foldably connected to the central panel, and at least one side panel is foldably connected to the at least one attachment panel at a second fold line such that the second fold line is spaced apart from the opening (Tye; fig. 1 and claim 1).
Claims 7, 56. Tye-Baker discloses the tray of claim 4, wherein the at least one attachment panel is foldably connected to the central panel, the at least one side panel is foldably connected to the at least one attachment panel, the at least one bottom panel is a first bottom panel 329 foldably connected to the at least one end panel, and the plurality of panels further comprises a second bottom panel 333 foldably connected to the at least one side panel, the first bottom panel and the second bottom panel are in at least partial face-to-face contact to at least partially form the bottom wall of the tray (Tye; [0047], fig. 9).
Claims 8, 57. Tye-Baker discloses the tray of claim 7, wherein the at least one attachment panel is a first attachment panel, the plurality of panels further comprises a second attachment panel 39 in at least partial face-to-face contact with the central panel, the at least one side panel is a first side panel foldably connected to the first attachment panel (fig. 1), the plurality of panels further comprises a second side panel foldably connected to the second attachment panel, the at least one end panel is a first end panel foldably connected to the central panel, the plurality of panels further comprises a second end panel foldably connected to the central panel (Tye; fig. 3),
a third bottom panel 371 foldably connected to the second side panel (Tye; fig. 8), and a fourth bottom panel 375 foldably connected to the second end panel 17,
the first side panel, the second side panel, the first end panel, and the second end panel at least partially forming the sidewall of the tray, the first bottom panel, the second bottom panel, the third bottom panel, and the fourth bottom panel at least partially forming the bottom wall of the tray (Tye; fig. 10A).
Claim(s) 3 and 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tye et al. (2020/0047975) in view of Baker er al. (US 2013/0327819) in view of Pantelleria (US 2014/0263595).
Claims 3, 52. Tye-Baker discloses the tray of claim 2, but fails to teach a notch being defined on the interior of the tray. Pantelleria teaches wherein the at least one notch is at least partially defined along an interior edge of the central panel (fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the interior walls of Tye-Baker to include the defined interior notch of Pantelleria to further secure the placement of the tray when stored within the outer tray.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-16 and 58-68 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAVEN COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-1672. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm 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, ANTHONY STASHICK can be reached at 571-272-4561. 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.
/RAVEN COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735