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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09 April 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 6 and 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ragettli (US 3,495,736). Regarding claim 1, Ragetti discloses a container comprising: a container body (10) having a first end (11) comprising an opening and a second end (12) opposite the first end, the second end having a closed rounded shape, the container body further comprising a container wall between the opening and the second end, the container wall having an interior surface comprising a single substantially continuous rounded wall face with a plurality of smooth indentations (13 and/or 15) therein arranged in a helical configuration around the wall face between the opening and the second opposite end, the second end being a bottom of the container body and having no corners (see col. 2, lines 5-8). Regarding claim 2, the plurality of smooth indentations are equally spaced about the rounded wall face (see Fig. 1). Regarding claim 3, the plurality of smooth indentations comprises six indentations (see Fig. 1). Regarding claim 6 the container has a larger diameter at the first end than at the second end (see Fig. 1). Regarding claim 8, the container wall is a single wall and wherein the container wall has an exterior surface with a plurality of protrusions matching the plurality of smooth indentations on the interior surface (see Fig. 1). Regarding claim 9, the container wall comprises a double wall configuration having an exterior surface separated from the interior surface (see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 10, the exterior surface comprises a plurality of smooth protrusions matching the plurality of smooth indentations on the interior surface (see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 11, the exterior surface comprises a plurality of smooth protrusions different from the plurality of smooth indentations on the interior surface (see Figs. 3). Regarding claim 12, the exterior surface comprises a smooth exterior surface (see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 13, the exterior surface includes a flat bottom (see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 14, each of the plurality of smooth indentations comprises a depression with rounded edges providing a substantially continuous smooth surface without sharp edges (see Fig. 1).
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 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ragettli (US 3,495,736). The container of Ragettli was discussed above. Regarding claim 4, as seen in Fig. 1, each indentation subtends approximately 120 degrees; however, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have discovered an optimal or workable range for this parameter based upon column 2, lines 27-50. Regarding claim 7, while the first end diameter is slightly larger than the second end diameter, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have discovered an optimal or workable range of relative diameters.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-20 are allowed.
Claim 5 is 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 falsely states “Both claims 1 and 15 recite a device having a rounded bottom with no corners or sharp edges.” In truth, there is no mention of edges in claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID L SORKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1148. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-3:30pm.
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, Claire X Wang can be reached at (571) 270-1051. 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.
DAVID L. SORKIN
Examiner
Art Unit 1774
/DAVID L SORKIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights