Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/299,681

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LOCKING PACKAGING CONTAINER

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Apr 12, 2023
Examiner
HODGE, LINDA J
Art Unit
3731
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
All Packaging Company LLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
183 granted / 210 resolved
+17.1% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
256
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
38.3%
-1.7% vs TC avg
§102
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§112
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 210 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 Receipt is acknowledged of an amendment, filed 27 October 2025, which has been placed of record and entered in the file. Status of the claims: Claims 1-22 are pending. Claims 1, 3-9, and 12-22 are amended. Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from consideration. Specification and Drawings: Amendments to the specification and drawings have not been submitted in the amendment filed 27 October 2025. Election/Restrictions Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12 August 2024. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 7 is ambiguous as lacking proper antecedent basis in the claim for “the two side panels of the inner sleeve”. Claim 5, on which claim 7 depends, recites compartment panels of the inner sleeve, including two compartment sidewalls, a middle panel, two compartment top panels, and a bottom panel. Claim 1, on which claim 7 depends, sets forth “two side panels of the outer sleeve”. It appears that claim 7 should be amended to change “the two side panels of the inner sleeve” to --the two compartment top panels of the inner sleeve--. Clarification and/or correction is required. Claims 8-10 depend from claim 7 and are likewise rejected. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-6, 11-12, and 21-22 are allowed. Claims 7-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding independent claim 1: the subject matter of claim 1 is allowable over the prior art because of the combination of structural limitations and their functional relationship to one another. Claim 1 includes the following limitations which in combination with the other limitations of the claim are not taught or suggested by the prior art: “assembling the outer sleeve, the outer sleeve comprises a first glue lap of the outer sleeve, two side panels of the outer sleeve, a top panel of the outer sleeve, and a bottom panel of the outer sleeve, wherein the first glue lap of the outer sleeve is directly attached on a first side of the first glue lap to one of the two side panels of the outer sleeve in an unassembled configuration, wherein assembling the outer sleeve comprises: applying glue on the first glue lap of the outer sleeve; and folding the first glue lap of the outer sleeve onto the bottom panel of the outer sleeve such that the glue adheres the first glue lap of the outer sleeve to the bottom panel of the outer sleeve, wherein the first glue lap of the outer sleeve and the bottom panel of the outer sleeve form a locking ridge of the outer sleeve, wherein the locking ridge comprises a cut-out of the first glue lap that extends from a second side of the glue lap opposite the first side of the first glue lap”. Regarding independent claim 12: the subject matter of claim 12 is allowable over the prior art because of the combination of structural limitations and their functional relationship to one another. Claim 12 includes the following limitations which in combination with the other limitations of the claim are not taught or suggested by the prior art: “assembling the outer sleeve, the outer sleeve comprises a first glue lap, two side panels, a top panel, and a bottom panel, wherein the first glue lap is directly attached on a first side of the first glue lap to one of the two side panels in an unassembled configuration, wherein assembling the outer sleeve comprises: applying glue on the first glue lap; and folding the first glue lap onto the bottom panel such that the glue adheres the first glue lap to the bottom panel, wherein the first glue lap and the bottom panel form a locking ridge of a locking mechanism, wherein the locking ridge comprises a cut-out of the first glue lap that extends from a second side of the glue lap opposite the first side of the first glue lap”. Weston et al. (US Patent Publ. No. 2012/0012497) is considered to be the closest prior art. Weston et al. disclose a method of manufacturing a packaging apparatus including assembling an outer sleeve including a first glue lap, two side panels, a top panel, and a bottom panel, the first glue lap directly attached to one of the side panels, applying glue on the first glue lap and folding the first glue lap onto the bottom panel such that the glue adheres the first glue lap to the bottom panel, wherein the first glue lap and the bottom panel form a locking ridge. Weston et al. disclose a locking ridge of the first glue lap comprising a cutout (fig. 12). Weston et al. fail to disclose a cutout that extends from a second side of the glue lap. Weston (US Patent No. 7,810,640) discloses a method of manufacturing a packaging apparatus including an outer sleeve and an inner sleeve comprising assembling the outersleeve, the outersleeve including a first lap, two side panels, a top panel, and a bottom panel, wherein the first lap is directly attached to one of the side panels, folding the first lap onto the bottom panel, wherein the first lap and the bottom panel form a locking ridge, assembling the inner sleeve, the inner sleeve comprising a locking tab configured to interface with the locking ridge of the outer sleeve. Weston discloses a locking ridge of the first lap comprising a cutout (fig. 5). Weston fails to disclose a cutout that extends from a second side of the lap. The difference between the claimed subject matter and Weston et al. ‘497, or a combination of Weston et al. ‘497 and Weston ‘640, is that Weston et al. ‘497, or a combination of Weston et al. ‘497 and Weston ‘640, do not disclose or teach “assembling the outer sleeve, the outer sleeve comprises a first glue lap of the outer sleeve, two side panels of the outer sleeve, a top panel of the outer sleeve, and a bottom panel of the outer sleeve, wherein the first glue lap of the outer sleeve is directly attached on a first side of the first glue lap to one of the two side panels of the outer sleeve in an unassembled configuration, wherein assembling the outer sleeve comprises: applying glue on the first glue lap of the outer sleeve; and folding the first glue lap of the outer sleeve onto the bottom panel of the outer sleeve such that the glue adheres the first glue lap of the outer sleeve to the bottom panel of the outer sleeve, wherein the first glue lap of the outer sleeve and the bottom panel of the outer sleeve form a locking ridge of the outer sleeve, wherein the locking ridge comprises a cut-out of the first glue lap that extends from a second side of the glue lap opposite the first side of the first glue lap” as set forth in claim 1; and “assembling the outer sleeve, the outer sleeve comprises a first glue lap, two side panels, a top panel, and a bottom panel, wherein the first glue lap is directly attached on a first side of the first glue lap to one of the two side panels in an unassembled configuration, wherein assembling the outer sleeve comprises: applying glue on the first glue lap; and folding the first glue lap onto the bottom panel such that the glue adheres the first glue lap to the bottom panel, wherein the first glue lap and the bottom panel form a locking ridge of a locking mechanism, wherein the locking ridge comprises a cut-out of the first glue lap that extends from a second side of the glue lap opposite the first side of the first glue lap” as set forth in claim 12. The difference between the claimed subject matter and Weston et al. ‘497, or a combination of Weston et al. ‘497 and Weston ‘640, would not have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since such modifications to the Weston et al. ‘497 structure and method would have gone beyond mere substitution or incorporation of a known structure and manipulative step capable of achieving predictable results. Any modification to the Weston et al. ‘497 structure and method to arrive at the claimed subject matter would have required a reworking of the structure and method and the principle of operation in a manner which would not have been apparent to a person having ordinary skill in the relevant art, and would have required the improper benefit of the teachings of Applicant’s disclosure. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Response to Arguments With respect to the rejection of claims 7-10 under 35 USC 112(b), applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the claims have been amended. In response, Claim 7 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim for “the two side panels of the inner sleeve”. Claim 5, on which claim 7 depends, recites compartment panels of the inner sleeve, including two compartment sidewalls, a middle panel, two compartment top panels, and a bottom panel. Claim 1, on which claim 7 depends, sets forth “two side panels of the outer sleeve”. Thus, in view of all of the above, the rejection of claims 7-10 is still deemed proper. The examiner made several attempts to reach applicant’s attorney to conduct a telephone interview, but did not result in conducting an interview. With respect to the rejection of claims 12 and 22 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) over Weston et al. ‘497, and the rejection of claims 1-12 and 21-22 under 35 USC 103 over Weston ‘640 in view of Weston et al. ‘497, the amendments and applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection is hereby withdrawn. With respect the request for rejoinder, applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the restriction requirement between elected claims 1-12 and non-elected claims 13-20 should be withdrawn because where restriction is required between independent or distinct processes, “and all claims directed to an elected invention are allowable, any restriction requirement between the elected invention and any nonelected invention that depends from or otherwise requires all the limitations of an allowable claim should be withdrawn”. In response, nonelected claims 13-20 do not require all the limitations of the allowable claims. In particular, allowed claim 1 requires a method of manufacturing a packaging apparatus including an outer sleeve and an inner sleeve comprising assembling the outer sleeve, wherein assembling the outer sleeve comprises: applying glue on the first glue lap of the outer sleeve; and folding the first glue lap of the outer sleeve onto the bottom panel of the outer sleeve such that the glue adheres the first glue lap of the outer sleeve to the bottom panel of the outer sleeve, wherein the first glue lap of the outer sleeve and the bottom panel of the outer sleeve form a locking ridge of the outer sleeve, wherein the locking ridge comprises a cut-out of the first glue lap that extends from a second side of the glue lap opposite the first side of the first glue lap; and assembling the inner sleeve, the inner sleeve comprises a locking tab of the inner sleeve configured to interface the locking ridge of the outer sleeve to secure the inner sleeve within the outer sleeve, the locking ridge of the outer sleeve and the locking tab of the inner sleeve at least partially define a locking mechanism. Allowed claim 12 requires a method of manufacturing a packaging apparatus including an outer sleeve, the method comprising: assembling the outer sleeve, wherein assembling the outer sleeve comprises: applying glue on the first glue lap; and folding the first glue lap onto the bottom panel such that the glue adheres the first glue lap to the bottom panel, wherein the first glue lap and the bottom panel form a locking ridge of a locking mechanism, wherein the locking ridge comprises a cut-out of the first glue lap that extends from a second side of the glue lap opposite the first side of the first glue lap. Nonelected independent claim 13 only requires a method comprising applying adhesive to a plurality of panels of an inner sleeve and an outer sleeve, wherein the plurality of panels are sized and shaped to form the inner sleeve and the outer sleeve; folding the plurality of panels of the inner sleeve and the outer sleeve to form the inner sleeve and the outer sleeve, the plurality of panels are folded such that portions of the plurality of panels with adhesive contact portions of the plurality of panels without adhesive and form the inner sleeve and the outer sleeve, wherein the locking ridge comprises a cut-out of the first glue lap that extends from a second side of the glue lap opposite the first side of the first glue lap; and folding the plurality of storage item panels of the inner sleeve toward a bottom panel of the inner sleeve to form an inner sleeve compartment. Thus, nonelected claim 13 does not require assembling an outer sleeve, applying glue on the first glue lap, and folding the first glue lap onto the bottom panel such that the glue adheres the first glue lap to the bottom panel forming a locking ridge. Accordingly, nonelected claims 13-20 do not require all the limitations of the allowable claims, and the restriction requirement is still deemed proper. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Linda J. Hodge whose telephone number is (571)272-0571. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00. 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, Shelley Self can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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. /LINDA J. HODGE/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 12, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 06, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 10, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 31, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 30, 2025
Interview Requested
May 08, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
May 08, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 19, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 27, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12544069
END TOOL OF SURGICAL INSTRUMENT, AND SURGICAL INSTRUMENT COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12527573
LINEAR SURGICAL STAPLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12527571
SURGICAL INSTRUMENT COMPRISING A FIRING DRIVE INCLUDING A SELECTABLE LEVERAGE MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12508022
SURGICAL STAPLER WITH TOGGLING DISTAL TIP
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12503327
METHOD OF WINDING AND PACKAGING WIDE WALLPAPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.7%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 210 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month