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 action is written in response to the amendment filed 09/03/2025
Claims 1, 5, 10 and 13 have been amended
Claims 1-16 are presented for examination
This action is 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 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuchenbecker (US 3,014,632) in view of Adams (US 10,183,777).
Claim 1. Kuchenbecker discloses a construct for providing divider features in the interior of a tray, the construct comprising:
a plurality of panels comprising at least one central panel 90, at least one bottom panel 93 foldably connected to the at least one central panel, and at least one divider panel 95 foldably connected to the at least one bottom panel (fig. 7); and
divider features comprising at least one divider wall 94 extending upwardly from the at least one bottom panel and comprising the at least one divider panel (col. 3, ll. 1-37).
Kuchenbecker fails to disclose a connector panel. Adams teaches at least one connector panel 38, 44 foldably connected along a fold line 92 to each of the at least one central panel 34 and the at least one divider panel 32a (fig. 6-7, 11). 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 divider panel of Kuchenbecher to include the connector panels of Adams to assist in further stabilizing the divider panel when placed on a pallet for display.
Claim 2. Kuchenbecker-Adams discloses the construct of claim 1, wherein the at least one divider panel 95 is a first divider panel foldably connected to the at least one bottom panel, the plurality of panels further comprises a second divider panel 98 foldably connected to the at least one bottom panel, the at least one divider wall is a first divider wall extending upwardly from the at least one bottom panel, and the divider features further comprise a second divider wall @102 extending upwardly from the at least one bottom panel and comprising the second divider panel (Kuchenbecker; fig. 7).
Claim 3. Kuchenbecker-Adams discloses the construct of claim 2, wherein the divider features further comprise a third divider wall @100 extending upwardly from the at least one bottom panel and comprising the at least one central panel (Kuchenbecker; col. 3, ll. 18-35).
Claim 4. Kuchenbecker-Adams discloses the construct of claim 3, wherein the first divider panel and the second divider panel are arranged in generally perpendicular relation to each of the at least one bottom panel and the at least one central panel (Kuchenbecker; fig. 7).
Claim 10. Kuchenbecker discloses a blank for providing divider features in the interior of a tray, the construct comprising:
a plurality of panels comprising at least one central panel 90, at least one bottom panel 93 foldably connected to the at least one central panel, at least one divider panel 95 foldably connected to the at least one bottom panel (fig. 7); and
divider features comprising at least one divider wall 94 extending upwardly from the at least one bottom panel and comprising the at least one divider wall of the construct formed from the blank (col. 3, ll. 1-37).
Kuchenbecker fails to disclose a connector panel. Adams teaches at least one connector panel 38, 44 foldably connected along a fold line 92 to each of the at least one central panel 34 and the at least one divider panel 32a (fig. 6-7, 11). 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 divider panel of Kuchenbecher to include the connector panels of Adams to assist in further stabilizing the divider panel when placed on a pallet for display.
Claim 11. Kuchenbecker-Adams discloses the blank of claim 10, wherein the at least one divider panel is a first divider panel 95 foldably connected to the at least one bottom panel, the plurality of panels further comprises a second divider panel 98 foldably connected to the at least one bottom panel, the at least one divider wall is a first divider wall for being formed by the first divider panel and extending upwardly from the at least one bottom panel when the construct is formed from the blank, and the plurality of panels further comprises a second divider panel for forming a second divider wall @102 extending upwardly from the at least one bottom panel when the construct is formed from the blank (Kuchenbecker; fig. 7).
Claim 12. Kuchenbecker-Adams discloses the blank of claim 11, wherein the at least one central panel is for forming a third divider wall @100 extending upwardly from the at least one bottom panel when the construct is formed from the blank (Kuchenbecker; col. 3, ll. 18-35).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9 and 13-16 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but in view of the amendment the search has been updated, new prior art has been identified and applied, and a new rejection has been made.
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 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