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 .
This Office Action is in response to the Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed on August 1, wherein: claim(s) 24 was amended. Examiner notes amendment is directed to overcome rejection under 35 USC § 112. Examiner’s further notes applicant’s arguments in aforementioned reply traversing rejections under 35 USC § 102 / 35 USC § 103. Therefore, claims 1-24 are pending and will be examined.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 1, 2025 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gu (U. S. Patent US7516842B2) hereinafter GU, in view of Chen (Taiwan Patent Application Publication TW202138157A) hereinafter CHEN.
Regarding claim 1, GU teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 below) an apparatus G1-00, comprising:
a structure 1, and the structure 1 comprises:
a body portion G6-01 that is an integral part of the structure 1; and
a pin 173 that is integral with the body portion G6-01, and
a portion G3-02 of the pin 173 is spaced (fig. 3) apart from the body portion G6-01 of the structure 1 so that a space (fig. 3) is defined between the portion G3-02 of the pin 173 and the body portion G6-01.
GU fails to teach structure 1 a blow molded structure 1.
GU fails to teach body portion G6-01 is a hollow body portion G6-01.
GU fails to teach structure 1 with one or more parting line G3-01.
However, CHEN teaches (see FIG. 1, FIG. 2, FIG. 5, FIG. 9 below) an apparatus C9-00, wherein structure 60 is a blow molded structure 60 (with one or more parting line C9-01) / body portion 61 is a hollow body portion 61 for weight reduction purposes (page 2, Description, lines 7-9, “… reduce the weight…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified structure 1 / body portion G6-01 in the apparatus G1-00 of GU with blow molded structure 60 / hollow body portion 61 as taught in the apparatus C9-00 of CHEN for weight reduction purposes.
PNG
media_image1.png
640
910
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
546
716
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
556
670
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
503
710
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
543
802
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
525
788
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
502
536
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
529
517
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
515
604
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
915
250
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
371
466
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the pin 173 is a solid element that comprises a parting line G3-01.
Regarding claim 3, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU fails to (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the pin 173 is a hollow, blow molded, element.
Furthermore, GU does not disclose any reason / advantage for the pin 173 to be hollow. However, like the cap at issue in Dulberg, it is desirable to reduce amount of material in the construction of apparatus G1-00 of GU and CHEN, and therefore, it would be obvious to make the pin 173 such it is hollow for that purpose.
Regarding claim 4, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the structure 1 is a lid 1 configured to be detachably connected to a box 2.
Regarding claim 5, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the structure 1 is a panel G1-04 configured to be detachably connected to another panel G1-05.
Regarding claim 6, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the pin 173 includes a first end G3-03 and a second end G3-04, and the pin 173 is attached to the body portion G6-01 at least at the first end G3-03 and the second end G3-04.
GU fails to teach pin 173 is attached to the body portion G6-01 only at the first end G3-03 and the second end G3-04.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified pin 173 to be attached to body portion G6-01 only at first end G3-03 / second end G3-04 in the apparatus G1-00 of GU and CHEN to meet design requirements since a change of form / 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 USPQ47.
Regarding claim 7, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, further comprising a hinge portion (C) that is configured to removably receive a pin 173 of a mating structure 1 and, when the pin 173 is so received, the apparatus G1-00 and the mating structure 1 are rotatable relative to each other.
Regarding claim 8, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 7 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the hinge portion (C) comprises one or more ribs G2-02 configured and arranged for an interference fit with the pin 173 of the mating structure 1.
Regarding claim 9, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the structure 1 comprises a lid 1, and the apparatus G1-00 further comprises a container body 2 to which the pin 173 of the lid 1 is configured to be removably attached.
Regarding claim 10, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 9 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, further comprising a land G3-05 that is integral with the pin 173 and with the lid 1.
Regarding claim 11, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 9 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, further comprising a support element G2-03 attached to the container body 2 and configured for contact with the pin 173.
Regarding claim 12, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 9 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, further comprising a closure mechanism 3 that is configured to releasably engage the pin 173.
Regarding claim 13, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 12 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the closure mechanism 3 comprises a latch 32 configured to releasably engage the pin 173, and the latch 32 is rotatably connected to a handle G2-04 that is operable to selectively engage the latch 32 with, and disengage the latch 32 from, the pin 173.
Regarding claim 14, GU teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) a container G1-00, comprising:
a body 2 that defines a volume; and
a lid 1 that includes a parting line C9-01 and is connected to the body 2 by a hinge 17, 18 located on one edge of the lid 1, and the lid 1 comprises:
a body portion G6-01 that is an integral part of the lid 1; and
a pin 173 that is integral with the body portion G6-01, and a portion G3-02 of the pin 173 is spaced (fig. 3) apart from the body portion G6-01 of the lid 1 so that a space (fig. 3) is defined between the portion G3-02 of the pin 173 and the body portion G6-01.
GU fails to teach lid 1 is a hollow blow-molded1.
However, CHEN teaches (see FIG. 1, FIG. 2, FIG. 5, FIG. 9 above) an apparatus C9-00, wherein lid 61 is a hollow blow molded lid 61 for weight reduction purposes (page 2, Description, lines 7-9, “… reduce the weight…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified lid 1 in the apparatus G1-00 of GU with hollow blow molded lid 61 as taught in the apparatus C9-00 of CHEN for weight reduction purposes.
Regarding claim 15, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, further comprising a latch mechanism 32 configured to releasably engage the pin 173.
Regarding claim 16, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, wherein the body 2 comprises a unified, single-piece, structure.
Regarding claim 17, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, wherein the body 2 comprises a hinge 3 configured to be releasably engaged by the pin 173.
Regarding claim 18, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, wherein the pin 173 is a solid, compression molded, element that comprises a parting line G3-01.
Regarding claim 19, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU fails to (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, wherein the pin 173 is a hollow, blow molded, element.
Furthermore, GU does not disclose any reason / advantage for the pin 173 to be hollow. However, like the cap at issue in Dulberg, it is desirable to reduce amount of material in the construction of container G1-00 of GU and CHEN, and therefore, it would be obvious to make the pin 173 such it is hollow for that purpose.
Regarding claim 20, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, wherein the container G1-00 comprises a box 2.
Regarding claim 21, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, wherein the pin 173 includes a first end G3-03 and a second end G3-04, and the pin 173 is attached to the body portion G6-01 at least at the first end G3-03 and the second end G3-04.
GU fails to teach pin 173 is attached to the body portion G6-01 only at the first end G3-03 and the second end G3-04.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified pin 173 to be attached to body portion G6-01 only at first end G3-03 / second end G3-04 in the container G1-00 of GU and CHEN to meet design requirements since a change of form / 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 USPQ47.
Regarding claim 22, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, wherein the pin 173 comprises a vestigial element 172.
Regarding claim 23, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) apparatus G1-00, wherein the structure 1 comprises plastic.
Regarding claim 24, GU and CHEN (as applied to claim 14 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. GU further teaches (see fig. 1 - fig. 7 above) container G1-00, wherein the lid 1 comprises plastic.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments regarding rejections under 35 USC § 112 of claim 24 in the reply filed August 1, 2025 have been found persuasive.
Applicant's arguments regarding rejections under 35 USC § 102 / 35 USC § 103 of claims 1-24 in aforementioned reply have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejections does not rely on exactly all references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the Applicant’s arguments.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Groves et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20220097926A1): Teaches a “storage system” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Ran et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20220094185A1): Teaches a “container” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Omry et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20190210213A1): Teaches a “toolbox” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Brown (U. S. Patent US207161A): Teaches a “household device” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Jasper et al. (U. S. Patent US1469567A): Teaches a “container” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Berfield (U. S. Patent US4501378A): Teaches a “latch” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Mcavoy (U. S. Patent US2206848A): Teaches a “container” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS JAVIER RODRIGUEZ MOLINA whose telephone number is (571) 272-8947. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM.
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 D. STASHICK can be reached on (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.
/M.J.R.M./
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735