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 .
Response to Amendment
Those rejections not repeated in this Office Action have been withdrawn.
Claims 1-3 and 12-15 are currently pending and rejected.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Norio et al. (JP 2007008493) in view of Kubo (JP 2009202881) and in further view of Yasuhide (JP2005041217) and Oshima (JP 2008074461) and in further view of any of Kashiwakura (US 20220025208), Webster (US 20200224053, Ghantous (US 20190062565) or Hibben (US 20150144522).
A machine translation has been relied on for each of Norio (JP 2007008493), Kubo (JP 2009202881), Oshima (JP 2008074461) and Yasuhide (JP 2005041217).
Regarding claim 1, Norio teaches an effervescent beverage can (see at least, paragraph 1 of the machine translation), comprising a top surface; a bottom surface; and a body (see paragraph 3 of the machine translation; paragraph 34 of the machine translation).
Norio’s effervescent beverage can has a capacity and also has an inner surface of the body provided with a number of first recesses and second recesses (see paragraph 22, 36 and 40 which teach particles of 0.3-7microns in diameter and figure 1, part 1 which shows the particles removed and the recesses being formed and where there are two different sized recesses). Norio also teaches that the first recesses have a diameter of 5 microns or more and 20 microns or less, such as 7 microns and further teaches that the second recesses are formed by particles that are smaller than those of the first recesses (see paragraph 40). At paragraph 58, Norio teaches that the small particles can have a diameter of 2 microns, thus suggesting recesses of 2 micron diameter when the particle has been removed.
Claim 1 differs from Norio in specifically reciting the effervescent beverage can has a capacity of 320 mL to 500 mL.
However, Kubo also teaches beverage cans for effervescent beverages (see the abstract and at least paragraphs 1-2) where the can has a capacity of 350cc (See paragraph 33). Kubo is also directed to pores for controlling foaming of the beverage (see paragraph 23).
Since Norio and Kubo are directed to beverage cans directed to controlling foaming of the beverage, and as Norio is not seen to provide any specificity as to the particular capacity of the beverage can, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified Norio’s beverage can to have a capacity of 350 mL-355mL because Kubo teaches that this is a conventional size for beverage cans used for packaging foaming beverages such as beer while providing the desired stability to the beverage can.
Claim 1 differs from the above combination in specifically reciting that, “an entire inner surface of the body is provided with a number of first recesses and second recesses and the number of the first recesses is 200 to 1200 per 1 mm^2, the second recesses have a diameter of 0.5micron or more and less than 5 micron, and the number of the second recesses is 7000 to 15000 per 1 mm^2.
Regarding the number of the first recesses, Yasuhide teaches beverage cans for also providing foaming of a beverage (see paragraph 1 of the machine translation) and where particles having a range of diameters are used to generate recesses on the body of the beverage can (see paragraph 15-16). Yasuhide further teaches that recesses with a diameter of 5 microns can be useful for promoting foam generation (see paragraph 27) and where these recesses can be on the body of the beverage can at 500 particles per 1 mm^2 for obtaining bubbles of a stable size (see paragraph 27, lines 346-350 of the machine translation). Yasuhide’s teachings above correspond with Norio’s first recesses and to therefore modify Norio so as to provide 500 recesses per 1 mm^2 would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art for the purpose of generating bubbles of a stable size.
Regarding the second recesses having a diameter of 0.5 micron or more and less than 5 micron, and the number of the second recesses is 7000 to 15000 per 1 mm^2, it is further noted that Yasuhide teaches recess having a size of 0.5 microns (see paragraph 27) and where such recesses can be present at 1000 or more per 1 mm^2 and should not exceed 10^6 per 1mm^2 for achieving the desired foam stability (see paragraph 27, lines 338-342; see also paragraph 27 of the JP patent which shows that the number of recesses can also not exceed 10^6). Therefore, Yasuhide also encompasses recesses having a diameter within the range of 0.5-5 microns and where the amount of the second recesses also encompasses the claimed amount of 7000-15000 per 1 mm^2 for achieving the desired foam stability.
Further regarding the second recesses, Oshima teaches recesses that can have a diameter of 0.5 microns or 1-5 microns (see paragraph 10, lines 177-180) and as a preference should not exceed 10^4 pores per mm^2 (see paragraph 10, lines 183-190 of the machine translation; see also paragraph 10 of the JP patent which shows that the number of recesses can also not exceed 10^4 ). As such, Oshima is suggesting pores with a diameter of 0.5 microns or 1 micron, for example, and where the number of these pores should be less than 10000, thus also falling within the range of claim 1. Oshima teaches that in these amounts, stable foam can be generated.
To therefore modify Norio’s second recesses and to use second recesses having a size such as 0.5 microns with in amount that is for example, more than 1000 per 1 mm^2 and less than 10000 per 1 mm^2 would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of achieving the desired foam stability, as suggested by Yasuhide and Oshima.
Regarding the limitation of, “an entire inner surface of the body is provided with” the number of first recesses and second recesses, it is noted that in view of Norio teaching “an entire inner surface” of the body is coated and has different particles therein (see paragraph 35, 87, 89 of the machine translation) and in view of the prior art combination teaching and suggesting the first and second recesses positioned on the inner surface of the body, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the prior art is suggesting “an entire” inner surface of the body is provided with the number of the first and second recesses. Norio also teaches that 20-60% of the inner surface of the can comprises recesses of one diameter while the remainder comprise particles of the other smaller diameter (see paragraph 22) thus suggesting an entire inner surface of the body is provided with the first and second recesses. It is also noted that Yasuhide is teaching a resin film coated metal plate, which is then used for producing metal cans (see the abstract), as does Oshima (see paragraph 29), which are also therefore suggesting an entire inner surface of the body can be provided with first and second recesses.
To therefore provide “an entire inner surface of the body” with the first and second recesses would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, as a matter of engineering and/or design for the purpose achieving the desired foam stability.
Regarding the limitation of one or both of the first and second recesses have an edge portion that is raised, it is noted that the claim does not provide any specificity with respect to what is the edge portion raised. In view of this, since Norio teaches that the recesses have edges, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the edges are raised compared to the lower surface of the recesses, for example.
Regarding the limitation to claim 1 of, “wherein the inner surface of the body is provided with a resin layer, and the first recesses and the second recesses are formed in the resin layer,” Norio further teaches wherein the inner surface of the body is provided with a resin layer and the first and second recesses are formed in the resin layer (see paragraph 0016).
Claim 1 differs from Norio in specifically reciting that, “the resin layer comprises urethane resin.”
Kashiwakura (US 20220025208) teaches beverage cans (see paragraph 2) that can have an interior, organic resin coating (see paragraph 27) and which organic resin coating can comprise a polyurethane resin (see paragraph 78), and therefore teaching that it has been known to include urethane resin as part of an interior coating to a beverage can. Kashiwakura also teaches additional film forming resins similar to that of Norio which can be used on their own or in combination (see Kashiwakura paragraph 78 and paragraph 134 of Norio); and Norio teaches that the resin materials can be used in combination and can have additional additives (see paragraph 134).
Webster (US 20200224053) teaches beverage cans for carbonated beverages such as beer (see paragraphs 80, 90 and 91) and which cans can have an interior coating (see paragraph 92) which do not alter the taste of the contents, avoid flaking, cracking or leaking (see paragraph 4) and which coating can comprise urethane resin (see paragraph 60). Webster also teaches additional film forming resins similar to that of Norio which can be used on their own or in combination (see Webster paragraph 60 and paragraph 134 of Norio) and Norio teaches that the resin materials can be used in combination and can have additional additives (see paragraph 134).
Ghantous (US 20190062565) teaches that known interior coatings for metal cans includes mixtures of resins including polyester, polyurethane, polyamide and polyether (see paragraph 7) and which metal cans are used for packaging beverages such as beer, for the purpose of preventing corrosion, and preventing contact of the contents with the metal of the container (see paragraph 3, 33-34). Ghantous’s resin materials for coating are similar to those taught at paragraph 134 of Norio.
Hibben (US 20150144522) teaches beverage cans (see paragraph 33, “cans”; paragraph 27, “drinks”) and which cans can comprise polyesters as well as polyurethane (see paragraph 78) and where the cans can comprise nucleation mechanisms such as recesses for bubbling (see paragraph 77 and figure 16). Hibben further teaches that polyurethane can also be used as part of a beverage can for also providing recesses within the interior surface of the beverage can.
To therefore modify Norio, who is not limiting as to the particular materials of the resin coating and to include urethane resin as part of the resin layer, would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art based on known materials used as a resin layer applied to the interior of a beverage can, for the purpose of providing corrosion resistance and preventing contact between the beverage and the metal of the can so as to prevent altering of the flavor of the beverage. Furthermore, Hibben evidences that nucleation sites/recesses that can cause bubbling are known to be produced using materials such as polyurethane. In view of these teachings, there would have been a reasonable expectation of success in also using a resin layer comprising urethane as part of Norio’s coating while also having recesses within the resin layer.
Regarding claim 2, in view of Yasuhide the combination suggests the first recesses being present on the body at 500 per 1 mm^2.
Regarding the number of second recesses, in view of Yasuhide and Oshima, the combination is suggesting for example, using greater than 1000 and less than 10000 of the second recesses per 1 mm^2. Ten thousand recesses is seen to encompass the claimed range and further is seen to be close to the claimed amount of 9552, for achieving a similar function of foam generation and stability of the foam, and therefore in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” and where the prior art teaches an amount that is merely close to the claimed amount, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(I)). Furthermore, in view of Yasuhide and Oshima teaching that the number of pores being used can vary for the purpose of achieving the desired foam generation and stability, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have experimented with recess diameters such as 0.5-1micron pores used in an amount that is less than 10000 per 1mm^2 for the purpose of achieving the desired foam and stability of the foam.
Regarding claim 3, the first recesses taught by Norio have a diameter of 5 or 7 microns (see paragraph 40 and 61) and therefore falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 12, the claim differs from Norio in specifically reciting, wherein the top surface is formed by a can lid configured to be opened in a fully open manner.
However, Oshima teaches a fully open lid to a beverage can has been desirable for providing additional visual enhancement to the beverage (see paragraph 25, lines 530-531). Kubo is similar in this regard (see paragraph 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified Norio’s lid to be a fully open lid to increase the visual enhancement of the beverage.
Regarding claim 13, Norio, Kubo, Oshima, Yasuhide and all teach an effervescent beverage can and further teach a drinkable liquid in the beverage can. Norio also that the beverage is an effervescent/foaming beverage and that the foam covers the surface of the beverage when the container is opened (see paragraph 5 of the machine translation: “…when the container is opened and the pressurized state of the carbonated beverage is released, the carbon dioxide gas that was dissolved under pressure in the carbonated beverage vaporizes, causing bubbles to form on the liquid surface. This foam covers the surface of the sparkling beverage…”). Oshima further teaches that by fully opening the beverage can, one can see the foam on the surface of the beverage (see paragraph 27, lines 530-531); as does Kubo (see paragraph 13). Yasuhide also teaches that when opening an effervescent beverage that the liquid foams when opened (see paragraph 85). Therefore, Norio together with Oshima, Kubo and Yasuhide teach hiding a top end portion of the effervescent beverage can for the purpose of providing a desirable visual enhancement to the beverage.
Regarding claim 14, Norio teaches the drinkable liquid is beer and therefore has been construed to read on “a beer.” (see paragraph 6 – “beer”), as do Oshima (paragraph 25); Kubo (abstract) and Yasuhide (paragraph 85).
Claims 1-4 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Nicholson (US 20120100266).
Regarding claim 1, Norio has been construed to teach an edge portion that is raised, as discussed above.
Regarding claim 15, Norio suggests that the first and second recesses are “crater-like,” and therefore resemble craters. Regarding the limitation of the wherein the edge portion is raised, the claims do not limit with respect to what are the edge portions of the recess raised. In view of this, Norio’s second recesses can be construed as having an edge that is reversely raised with respect to a sidewall of the container, for example.
If it could have been construed that the prior art as applied to claim 1 above did not suggest “the edge portion of the recess is raised”, then it is further noted that Nicholson teaches crater-like recesses that are also useful for controlling the effervescence of a beverage, and which crater-like recesses can have an edge portion that is reversely raised (see figure 12A2, item 607a, 604a and 605a; see paragraph 68 and 69). Nicholson teaches other configurations of crater like recesses, such as in figure 12B2 as well as providing other configurations such as roughened surfaces to increase the nucleation sites that control effervescence (see paragraph 72 and 74). To therefore modify Norio and to provide edge portions of the first and second recesses with edge portions that are raised and therefore, reversely raised would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, as an obvious change in shape of the recesses which the art has recognized to be used for the similar function for controlling the effervescence of a beverage.
Claims 2-4 and 12-14 are rejected for the reasons already discussed in the previous rejection above.
Response to Arguments
On page 5 of the response, Applicant urges that the combination does not teach or suggest, “the resin layer comprises urethane resin.”
This argument is not seen to be sufficient to overcome the rejection as presented in this Office Action, necessitated by the amendment to the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Inui (GB 2224238) teaches polyester coatings for the interior of beverage cans (see page 4, lines 1-8) which can comprise urethane (see page 3, lines 12-17 and page 7, lines 24-30 which teaches that the resin film can be precoated with a urethane resin) and teaches that the coating for a can used for carbonated beverages while also having excellent adhesion, low tendency to filiform corrosion and satisfactory corrosion resistance (see page 3, lines 1-11).
Gibanel (US 20190338144) teaches beverage containers for liquids such as beer (see paragraph 159) comprising an interior resin coating (figure 5, item 34) which coating is safe for food contact, has excellent adhesion and resists degradation (see paragraph 4). Gibanel teaches that such a resin coating can also comprise urethane resin, including polyurethanes and polyester-urethanes (see paragraph 33).
Han (US 20170320629) teaches beverage cans (see paragraph 125) which can have an inner resin coating that can comprise urethane as a binder (see paragraph 106).
Seneker (US 20200207516) teaches beverage cans (see paragraph 3) that can have an internal coating such as of a polyester resin (see paragraph 340 “coating compositions may be applied to at least a portion of the interior of the can body” therefore encompassing the entirety of the can body interior; see paragraph 13-14) and which polyester resin can also include additional resin materials including polyurethane resins (see paragraph 314). Seneker teaches that such coatings can be useful providing clean rupturing of the can upon opening so as to provide sufficient venting (see paragraph 3 and 4).
Richman (US 20140178616) discloses interior coatings for beverage cans (paragraph 17, 43) which interior coatings can comprise urethane resins (paragraph 10).
Cavallin (US 20140319012) discloses urethane coatings for beverage cans (see the abstract) which urethane coatings (paragraph 7, 12, 33 and 34) have excellent adhesion to the substrate and resist degradation (see paragraph 158-160). Cavallin also teaches that there can be acrylic polymers as part of the coating (see paragraph 77) and therefore teaches similar resin materials as at paragraph 134 of Norio. At paragraph 134, Norio also allows for additional components to be present as part of the resin.
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 VIREN THAKUR whose telephone number is (571)272-6694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10:30-7:00pm.
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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached on 571-270-3475. 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.
/VIREN A THAKUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792