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 .
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.
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.
Claims 25-28 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalzell (US 305,674) in view of Mercier (US 6,796,430).
Regarding claim 25, Dalzell (figs. 1-2) discloses a combination tableware arrangement, comprising:
a first tableware member a having a first base portion connected to generally upstanding first sidewall portions of said first tableware member a, said first sidewall portions terminating opposite said first base portion at a first lip portion e, said first lip portion e thereby defining a first height of said first tableware member, said first tableware member a having a first interior surface and a first external surface, said first sidewall portions having a first recessed platform d creating a first interior raised ledge disposed at a first intermediate position along said first interior surface such that said first interior raised ledge d is positioned between said first base portion and said first lip portion e, said first lip portion e having an uppermost edge terminating at an outwardly extending first rim, said first tableware member including a first ring footing b on said first external surface of said first base portion, wherein said first sidewall portions define a first sidewall profile between said first base portion and said first interior raised ledge d;
a second tableware member a’ having a second base portion connected to generally upstanding second sidewall portions of said second tableware member a’, said second sidewall portions terminating opposite said second base portion at a second lip portion e’, said second lip portion e’ thereby defining a second height of said second tableware member a’, said second tableware member having a second interior surface and a second external surface, said second sidewall portions having a second recessed platform creating a second interior raised ledge d’ disposed at a second intermediate position along said second interior surface such that said second interior raised ledge is positioned between said second base portion and said second lip portion, said second lip portion having an uppermost edge terminating at an outwardly extending second rim, said second tableware member including a second ring footing c’ on said second external surface of said second base portion, wherein said second sidewall portions define a second sidewall profile between said second base portion and said second interior raised ledge e’, said second sidewall profile being different than said first sidewall profile;
wherein said first tableware member and said second tableware member are configured such that said first tableware member is stackable with said second tableware member in the following configurations:
said second tableware member a’ in an inverted orientation and on said first tableware member a in an upright orientation, with said outwardly extending second rim e’ seated on said first interior raised ledge d and said second tableware member maintained laterally in place relative to said first tableware member by said second lip portion.
Dalzell fails to disclose said second tableware member in an upright orientation and on said first tableware member in an inverted orientation, with said second ring footing in contact with the inward-facing portion of said first ring footing.
However, Marcier teaches a bottom of a container or tableware 1 having leg portions 110 capable of frictionally engaging projections 212 of a cover (figs. 3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have made the feet of the first and second tableware members of Dalzell, capable of engaging, as taught by Mercier, to prevent undesired lateral shifting of the containers when they are arranged in vertically superposed order.
Regarding claim 26, Dalzell further discloses the tableware having inner and outer leg portions c, c’, b, b’ (figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 27, the modified Dalzell further discloses when said second tableware member is in the upright orientation and on said first tableware member in the inverted orientation, said first inner ring footing c is aligned with said second inner ring footing c’ (fig. 1 of Dalzell).
Regarding claim 28, Dalzell further discloses said first inner ring footing c has a distal edge that is offset, in a direction toward said first base portion, from a distal edge of said first outer ring footing, and said second inner ring footing c’ has a distal edge that is offset, in a direction toward said second base portion, from a distal edge of said second outer ring footing b’ (figs. 1-2)
Regarding claim 31, a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Claims 1-5, 12-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalzell (US 305,674) in view of Mercier (US 6,796,430) further in view of Furlong (US 8,322,530).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Dalzell (figs. 1-2) discloses a combination tableware arrangement, comprising:
a first tableware member a having a first base portion connected to generally upstanding first sidewall portions of said first tableware member a, said first sidewall portions terminating opposite said first base portion at a first lip portion e, said first lip portion e thereby defining a first height of said first tableware member, said first tableware member a having a first interior surface and a first external surface, said first sidewall portions having a first recessed platform d creating a first interior raised ledge disposed at a first intermediate position along said first interior surface such that said first interior raised ledge d is positioned between said first base portion and said first lip portion e, said first lip portion e having an uppermost edge terminating at an outwardly extending first rim, said first tableware member including a first ring footing b on said first external surface of said first base portion, wherein said first sidewall portions define a first sidewall profile between said first base portion and said first interior raised ledge d;
a second tableware member a’ having a second base portion connected to generally upstanding second sidewall portions of said second tableware member a’, said second sidewall portions terminating opposite said second base portion at a second lip portion e’, said second lip portion e’ thereby defining a second height of said second tableware member a’, said second tableware member having a second interior surface and a second external surface, said second sidewall portions having a second recessed platform creating said first sidewall profile; wherein the first and second tableware members are configured such that they are stackable with each other in the following configuration:
the second tableware member a’ in an inverted orientation and on said first tableware member a in an upright orientation, with said outwardly extending second rim e’ seated on said first interior raised ledge d and said second tableware member maintained laterally in place relative to said first tableware member a by said first lip portion e.
Dalzell fails to disclose:
a third and fourth tableware member similar to the first and second tableware members having different sidewall profiles;
wherein said first, second, third and fourth tableware members are configured such that said second tableware member is stackable with each of the first, third and fourth tableware members in the following configurations:
said first tableware member in an upright orientation and on said second tableware member in an inverted orientation, with said first ring footing in contact with an inward-facing portion of said second ring footing;
said second tableware member in the inverted orientation and on said fourth tableware member in an upright orientation, with said outwardly extending second rim seated on said fourth interior raised ledge and said second tableware member maintained laterally in place relative to said fourth tableware member by said fourth lip portion;
said fourth tableware member in an upright orientation and on said second tableware member in the inverted orientation, with said fourth ring footing in contact with the inward-facing portion of said second ring footing; and
said third tableware member in an upright orientation and on said second tableware member in the inverted orientation, with said third ring footing in contact with the inward-facing portion of said second ring footing;
said second tableware member in an upright orientation and on said first tableware member in an inverted orientation, with said second ring footing in contact with an outward-facing portion of said first ring footing; wherein said first tableware member and said third tableware member are configured such that said first tableware member is stackable with the third tableware member in the following configuration:
said third tableware member in an inverted orientation and on said first tableware member in the upright orientation, with said outwardly extending third rim seated on said first interior raised ledge and said third tableware member maintained laterally in place relative to said first tableware member by said first lip portion;
wherein said third tableware member and said fourth tableware member are configured such that said third tableware member is stackable with said fourth tableware member in the following orientation:
said third tableware member in the inverted orientation an on said fourth tableware member in the upright orientation, with said outwardly extending third rim seated on said fourth interior raised ledge and said third tableware member maintained laterally in place relative to said fourth tableware member by said fourth lip portion.
However, Marcier teaches a bottom of a container or tableware 1 having leg portions 110 capable of frictionally engaging projections 212 of a cover (figs. 3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have made the feet of the first and second tableware members of Dalzell, capable of engaging, as taught by Mercier, to prevent undesired lateral shifting of the containers when they are arranged in vertically superposed order.
Further, Furlong teaches a plurality of different size containers 22, 24, 26 with different profiles having the same size opening (figs. 1 and 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have provided the modified device of Dalzell, at least third and fourth tableware members, having the same opening sizes as the first and second tableware members but different profiles than the first and second tableware members, so that at least the tableware members with same opening can have a cover or tableware member that is sized to fit the associated base tableware member, as taught by Furlong in col. 4, lines 1-4.
Regarding claim 2, Dalzell further discloses said second footing b’ is a flared, pedestal footing (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Mercier further teaches the tableware having inner and outer leg portions 110 (fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have made the legs of the four tablewares of the modified Dalzell, inner and outer leg portions, to provide advantages such as more secure attachment, as further taught by Mercier in col 3, lines 29-32.
Regarding claim 4, the modified Dalzell further discloses the first inner ring footing has a distal edge that is offset, in a direction toward said first base portion, from a distal edge of said first outer ring footing (fig. 5 of Mercier).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Dalzell further discloses the third inner ring footing has a distal edge that is offset, in a direction toward said third base portion, from a distal edge of said third outer ring footing (fig. 5 of Mercier).
Regarding claims 13-15, Mercier further teaches the tableware having inner and outer leg portions 110 (fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have made the legs of the four tablewares of the modified Dalzell, inner and outer leg portions, to provide advantages such as more secure attachment, as further taught by Mercier in col 3, lines 29-32.
Regarding the locations of the legs, It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 17, Dalzell further discloses the second ring footing b’ being outwardly flared and being capable of serving as a grip when said second tableware member is in the inverted orientation (figs. 1-2).
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalzell (US 305,674) in view of Mercier (US 6,796,430) further in view of Furlong (US 8,322,530) as applied to claims 3 and 13 above, further in view of Castrey (GB2609252).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, the modified Dalzell discloses all elements of the claimed invention except for said third tableware member includes a protruding exterior ledge along said third external surface and, when said third tableware member is in the upright orientation and on said first tableware member in the inverted orientation, the protruding exterior ledge is in contact with a distal edge of said first outer ring footing.
However, Castrey teaches a tableware member 34 including a protruding exterior ledge along an external surface and, when the tableware member 34 is in the upright orientation and on another tableware member 30 in the inverted orientation, said protruding exterior ledge is in contact with a distal edge of a first ring footing of the other tableware member 30 (fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have provided the third tableware member of the modified Dalzell a protruding exterior ledge, as taught by Castrey, to provide additional support.
Claims 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalzell (US 305,674) in view of Mercier (US 6,796,430) in view of Castrey (GB2609252).
Regarding claims 29- 30, the modified Dalzell discloses all elements of the claimed invention except for said second tableware member includes a protruding exterior ledge along said second external surface and, when said second tableware member is in the upright orientation and on said first tableware member in the inverted orientation, said protruding exterior ledge is in contact with a distal edge of said first ring footing.
However, Castrey teaches a second tableware member 34 including a protruding exterior ledge along an external surface and, when said second tableware member 34 is in the upright orientation and on a first tableware member 30 in the inverted orientation, said protruding exterior ledge is in contact with a distal edge of a first ring footing of the first tableware member 30 (fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have provided the second tableware member of the modified Dalzell a protruding exterior ledge, as taught by Castrey, to provide additional support.
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 BLAINE GIRMA NEWAY whose telephone number is (571)270-5275. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM- 5:00PM.
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.
/BLAINE G NEWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735