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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8-9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WIPO Publication WO 2020/093009 A1 to Madanagopal et al (“Madanagopal”), as cited by applicant, in view of U.S. PGPUB 2023/0131560 A1 to Blezard et al. (“Blezard”).
As to claim 1, Madanagopal teaches insert for holding an insulating material of a transport container, comprising a lid compartment (second leg 94A), a bottom compartment (first leg 92A) and at least one side wall (second liner portion 50B) which comprises a continuous holding compartment (channel 54A) for an insulating material (insulation sheets 56A), which holding compartment in a laterally fully surrounding fashion encloses a holding space bounded by the lid compartment and the bottom compartment (Madanagopal Fig. 1 shows the first liner portion 50A and the second liner portion 50B with a space between the second liner portion 50B to hold an item), wherein internal side surfaces of the side wall are directly adjacent to each other in an unconnected state (Madanagopal Fig. 2 shows the second liner portion 50B is directly adjacent to each other in an unconnected state) and external side surfaces of the side wall are directly adjacent to each other in a connected state (Madanagopal Fig. 1 shows the external side surfaces of the second liner portion are directly adjacent to each other in a connected state), wherein the insulating material is replaceable (Madanagopal, pg. 17-18, ¶ 0160 says that insulation sheets 56A are disposed within the channel 54A which are capable of being replaced); but does not teach wherein the lid compartment, the bottom compartment and the side wall each comprise an opening for introducing and removing an insulating material.
Blezard teaches wherein the lid compartment (lid cavity 40), the bottom compartment (bottom cavity 50) and the side wall (side cavity 44) each comprise an opening (Blezard, pg. 4, ¶ 0052, Blezard Fig. 15-17 shows the strengthening panel 48 closing the side cavity 44 so the bottom cavity 50 can be filled, Blezard Fig. 9-14 shows the bottom of the container 10 open to fill the side cavity 44, respectively) for introducing and removing an insulating material (Blezard, pg. 3-4, ¶ 0045-0052).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the method of filling the compartments of Blezard with the insert as taught by Madanagopal to provide a container with a consistent insulating value throughout the container (Blezard, abstract).
As to claim 3, Madanagopal modified by Blezard teaches insert according to claim 1, wherein the side wall comprises exactly four sides (94B, 90B, 92B, and 90A).
As to claim 4, Madanagopal modified by Blezard teaches insert according to claim 1, wherein, in the intended use, complementarily formed abutting surfaces of the side wall each lie on top of each other under a 45° cutting plane (Madanagopal, pg. 18, ¶ 0161).
As to claim 8, Madanagopal modified by Blezard teaches transport system comprising an outer carton (container 12) with an insert (liner 14A) according to claim 1.
As to claim 9, Madanagopal modified by Blezard teaches transport system according to claim 8, wherein the insulating material in the insert is selected from the following insulation materials: paper shavings, corrugated cardboard (Madanagopal, pg. 19-20, ¶ 0165), cellulose (loose or in paper form), honeycomb board, molded fiber jute, hemp, flax, cork granules, cork board, reed, sea grass, straw, meadow grass, coconut fiber, rice husks, grain husks sheep wool wood wool, wood fiber, wood chips, wood fiber board.
As to claim 11, Madanagopal modified by Blezard teaches transport system according to claim 8, further comprising at least one cooling element (cold source 100).
Claim(s) 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Madanagopal in view of Blezard further in view of US PGPUB 2019/0367209 A1 to Jobe (“Jobe”).
As to claim 5, Madanagopal modified by Blezard teaches insert according to claim 1, but does not teach wherein, in the intended use, the lid compartment and the bottom compartment each adjoin a complementarily formed contact surface of the side wall at an angle greater than 45°.
Jobe wherein, in the intended use, the lid compartment (top pad 36) and the bottom compartment (bottom pad 32) each adjoin a complementarily formed contact surface of the side wall (collar 34) at an angle greater than 45° (Jobe Fig. 1 shows the top pad 36 and the bottom pad 32 contact the collar 34 at 90° angle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the top and bottom pads attached to the collar of Jobe with the insert as taught by Madanagopal modified by Blezard to provide a top pad and a bottom pad to fit snugly at the cavity (Jobe, pg. 3, ¶ 0062).
As to claim 7, Madanagopal modified by Blezard teaches insert according to claim 1, but does not teach wherein the lid compartment and the bottom compartment are each formed in a cuboid shape.
Jobe teaches wherein the lid compartment (top pad 36) and the bottom compartment (bottom pad 32) are each formed in a cuboid shape (Jobe Fig. 1 shows the top pad 36 and the bottom pad 32 are a cuboid shape).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the use the top pad and bottom pad of Jobe with the insert as taught by Madanagopal modified by Blezard to provide a top pad and a bottom pad to fit snugly at the cavity (Jobe, pg. 3, ¶ 0062).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Madanagopal in view of Blezard further in view of U.S. PGPUB 2017/0233165 A1 to Kuhn (“Kuhn”).
As to claim 10, Madanagopal modified by Blezard teaches transport system according to claim 8, but does not teach wherein the insulating material in the insert includes a vacuum insulation element.
Kuhn teaches wherein the insulating material in the insert includes a vacuum insulation element (first vacuum insulation panel 1, second vacuum insulation panel 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the vacuum insulation panels of Kuhn with the transport system as taught by Madanagopal modified by Blezard to provide a transport container that is suitable for the transport of temperature-sensitive products (Kuhn, pg. 1, ¶ 0003).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-11, filed 03/25/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, and 11 under 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art reference.
Conclusion
Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON LYNN POOS whose telephone number is (571)270-7427. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thus 10-3 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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.L.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/NATHAN J JENNESS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3733 2 June 2026