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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/13/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The recitation of “a lowest point” (claim 15, line 6) is believed to be --the lowest point--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-7 and 9-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pritchard (GB 2480582 A), Morris (US 5,597,097), O’Neal (US 9,874,425), and further in view of Burwell (US 5,617,582).
Regarding claim 1, Pritchard discloses a container to be worn by a user, said container comprising:
a hard plastic hollow body (10, said body being made of water-grade high-density polyethylene (HDPE)) having a front portion, back portion, top portion (14) and bottom portion (13) integrally formed from high-density polyethylene (refer to the first para. of the Detailed Description, wherein rigid bladder 10 is made of water-grade high-density polyethylene (HDPE)), the front portion being connected to the back portion by first (11) and second (12) side walls, said body having a port (refer to opening 85 as in fig. 8) formed through the bottom portion (13) to facilitate drainage through the port, to a hose (32), while being worn,
wherein the front and back portions, and the first and second side walls are curved in a same direction between the top and bottom portions (refer to Figs. 4-7) providing the container body with a concave contour to facilitate contour matching of a user’s torso (refer to page 6, par. 6, wherein an outer face of the body between the two sidewalls is concave so as to better accommodate a back wall of a personal load carriage system (e.g., back-pack) as it flexes around the back of a person carrying the back-pack; both opposing faces of the body may be curved in the same manner).
While Pritchard discloses the port formed through the bottom portion and facilitating drainage through said port at a point of the hollow body while being worn, Pritchard fails to explicitly disclose wherein the port is formed at a point where a bottom wall of the bottom portion connects to the first side wall, the bottom wall extending from a connection to the second side wall and sloping towards the point where the bottom wall connects to the first side wall to facilitate drainage through the port, to the hose, at a lowest point of the interior of the hollow body.
However, Morris teaches a fluid dispensing container (refer to figs. 1-3), comprising a hollow body (5) having a port (32) formed through a bottom portion at a point where a bottom wall (30) of the bottom portion connects to a first side wall (62), and wherein the bottom wall (30) extends from a connection to a second side wall (26) and sloping towards the point where the bottom wall (30) connects to the first side wall (62), in order to assist in the complete and full drainage of the fluid being held within the body as the fluid is passed out of the port, to a hose (hose 36, refer to col. 4, lines 64-67), at a lowest point of the interior of the hollow body (refer to fig.2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pritchard such that the port is formed at a point where a bottom wall of the bottom portion connects to the first side wall, the bottom wall extending from a connection to the second side wall and sloping towards the point where the bottom wall connects to the first side wall to facilitate drainage through the port, to the hose, at a lowest point of the interior of the hollow body in view of the teachings by Morris, in order to assist in complete and full drainage of the fluid held within the body.
While Pritchard as modified discloses the first side wall and the second side wall, Pritchard as modified fails to explicitly disclose the first side wall comprising a first upper side wall and a first lower side wall and the second side wall comprising a second upper side wall and a second lower side wall, the first and second upper side walls converge towards each other in an upwards direction of the container, the first and second lower side walls are joined to the first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and extend parallel to each other.
However, O’Neil further teaches an asymmetric body armor (refer to Fig. 1), comprising a first side wall including a first upper side wall (15) and a first lower side wall (13) and a second side wall including a second upper side wall (16) and a second lower side wall (14), the first and second upper side walls converge towards each other in an upwards direction (refer to Fig. 1), the first and second lower side walls are joined to the first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and extend parallel to each other (refer to Fig. 1), in order to provide enhanced mobility to a soldier to hoist, shoulder, aim, and fire a weapon (refer to col. 2, lines 52-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Pritchard such that the first side wall comprises a first upper side wall and a first lower side wall and the second side wall comprises a second upper side wall and a second lower side wall, the first and second upper side walls converge towards each other in an upwards direction of the container, the first and second lower side walls are joined to the first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and extend parallel to each other in view of the teachings by O’Neil, in order to provide enhanced mobility to a soldier.
While Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the body is configured to be slid into a user’s day-pack (101), Pritchard as modified fails to explicitly disclose wherein the body is configured to be slid into a user’s apparel without using straps.
However, Burwell further teaches a load bearing vest (refer to figs. 3 and 19), wherein a body (refer to water bladder 190 including hose 194) is configured to be slid into a user’s apparel without using straps (refer to col. 8, lines 4-8, wherein the vest includes a pouch 186 disposed over the rear panel of the vest, the pouch being sized to accommodate the body 190 for retaining drinking fluid, the bladder disposed in the pouch, and the drinking hose extending from the bladder), in order to provide a load bearing vest for use by military and police personnel that provides a conveniently located drinking feature (refer to col. 1, lines 20-23).
One having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration would recognize that by providing the body to be slid into a user’s apparel without using straps, it will facilitate the removal and insertion of the body into the user’s apparel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Pritchard such that the body is configured to be slid into a user’s apparel without using straps in view of the teachings by Burwell, in order to facilitate the removal and insertion of the body into the user’s apparel.
Regarding claim 2, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the port (refer to opening 85 as in fig. 8) is formed from high-density polyethylene (refer to the first para. of the Detailed Description, wherein rigid bladder 10 is made of water-grade high-density polyethylene (HDPE), in the instant case the port 85 is formed as a recessed portion of an outer edge of the body, therefore being formed from the same material).
Regarding claim 4, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the body (10) has a shape that substantially matches a profile silhouette (refer to page 6, par. 6, wherein an outer face of the body between the two sidewalls is concave so as to better accommodate a back wall of a personal load carriage system, as it flexes around the back of a person; both opposing faces of the body may be curved in the same manner) of the user’s apparel comprising a military body armor (refer to the ballistics armor vest prepared to don the load bearing vest as in fig. 7 as taught by Burwell).
Regarding claim 5, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses said body being adapted to contain a substance (water) for providing thermal regulation to the user’s body when the container is adjacent the user’s body and for providing hydration when consumed by the user through the port. Note: the recitations “for providing thermal regulation to the user’s body when the container is adjacent the user’s body” and “for providing hydration when consumed by the user through the port” have been considered recitations of intended use. It has been held that the recitation with respect to the matter in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations.
Regarding claim 6, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 5. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the hose (32) is connected to the port (refer to fig. 4) for allowing the user to dispense the substance via the hose.
Regarding claim 7, Pritchard discloses a container to be worn by a user (refer to Fig. 10), said container comprising:
a hard plastic hollow body (10, said body being made of water-grade high-density polyethylene (HDPE)) having a front portion, back portion, top portion (14) and bottom portion (13) integrally formed from high-density polyethylene (refer to the first para. of the Detailed Description, wherein rigid bladder 10 is made of water-grade high-density polyethylene (HDPE)), the front portion being connected to the back portion by first (11) and second (12) side walls, said body having a surface with an outer edge and a port (refer to opening 85) formed through the bottom portion (13) within a recessed portion of the outer edge (refer to fig. 8 below) such that an outer portion of the port (85) is connected to a hose (32) while the container is worn.
PNG
media_image1.png
454
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
While Pritchard discloses the port formed through the bottom portion and being formed within the recessed portion of the outer edge, connected to a hose while the container is worn, Pritchard fails to explicitly disclose wherein the port is formed at a point where a bottom wall of the bottom portion connects to the first side wall, and the bottom wall extending from a connection to the second side wall and sloping towards the point where the bottom wall connects to the first side wall and the port being formed within the recessed portion of the outer edge where the bottom wall connects to the first side wall such that an outer portion of the port is below an outer portion of the outer edge, the port being at a lowest point of an interior of the hollow body while the container is worn.
However, Morris teaches a fluid dispensing container (refer to figs. 1-3), comprising a hollow body (5) having a port (32) formed through a bottom portion at a point where a bottom wall (30) of the bottom portion connects to a first side wall (62), and the bottom wall (30) extending from a connection to a second side wall (26) and sloping towards the point where the bottom wall (30) connects to the first side wall (62), such that an outer portion of the port (32), connected to a hose (38), is below an outer portion of an outer edge (refer to fig. 2 below), the port (32) being at a lowest point of an interior of the hollow body (refer to fig. 2 below), in order to assist in complete and full drainage of the fluid held within the body as the fluid is passed out of the port, to the hose (hose 36, refer to col. 4, lines 64-67).
PNG
media_image2.png
402
466
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pritchard such that the port is formed at a point where a bottom wall of the bottom portion connects to the first side wall, and the bottom wall extending from a connection to the second side wall and sloping towards the point where the bottom wall connects to the first side wall as taught by Morris, and the port being formed within the recessed portion of the outer edge where the bottom wall connects to the first side wall such that an outer portion of the port is below an outer portion of the outer edge, the port being at a lowest point of an interior of the hollow body while the container is worn, in order to assist in complete and full drainage of the fluid held within the body.
While Pritchard as modified discloses the first side wall and the second side wall, Pritchard as modified fails to explicitly disclose the first side wall comprising a first upper side wall and a first lower side wall and the second side wall comprising a second upper side wall and a second lower side wall, the first and second upper side walls converge towards each other in an upwards direction of the container, the first and second lower side walls are joined to the first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and extend parallel to each other.
However, O’Neil further teaches an asymmetric body armor (refer to Fig. 1), comprising a first side wall including a first upper side wall (15) and a first lower side wall (13) and a second side wall including a second upper side wall (16) and a second lower side wall (14), the first and second upper side walls converge towards each other in an upwards direction (refer to Fig. 1), the first and second lower side walls are joined to the first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and extend parallel to each other (refer to Fig. 1), in order to provide enhanced mobility to a soldier to hoist, shoulder, aim, and fire a weapon (refer to col. 2, lines 52-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Pritchard such that the first side wall comprises a first upper side wall and a first lower side wall and the second side wall comprises a second upper side wall and a second lower side wall, the first and second upper side walls converge towards each other in an upwards direction of the container, the first and second lower side walls are joined to the first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and extend parallel to each other in view of the teachings by O’Neil, in order to provide enhanced mobility to a soldier.
While Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the body is configured to be slid into a user’s day-pack (101), Pritchard as modified fails to explicitly disclose wherein the body is configured to be slid into a user’s apparel without using straps.
However, Burwell further teaches a load bearing vest (refer to figs. 3 and 19), wherein a body (refer to water bladder 190 including hose 194) is configured to be slid into a user’s apparel without using straps (refer to col. 8, lines 4-8, wherein the vest includes a pouch 186 disposed over the rear panel of the vest, the pouch being sized to accommodate the body 190 for retaining drinking fluid, the bladder disposed in the pouch, and the drinking hose extending from the bladder), in order to provide a load bearing vest for use by military and police personnel that provides a conveniently located drinking feature (refer to col. 1, lines 20-23).
One having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration would recognize that by providing the body to be slid into a user’s apparel without using straps, it will facilitate the removal and insertion of the body into the user’s apparel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Pritchard such that the body is configured to be slid into a user’s apparel without using straps in view of the teachings by Burwell, in order to facilitate the removal and insertion of the body into the user’s apparel.
Regarding claim 9, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 7. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the front and back portions, the first and second upper side walls, and the first and second lower side walls are curved in a same direction between the top and bottom portions (refer to Figs. 4-7) providing the container body with a concave contour to facilitate contour matching of a user’s torso (refer to page 6, par. 6, wherein an outer face of the body between the two sidewalls is concave so as to better accommodate a back wall of a personal load carriage system as it flexes around the back of a person; both opposing faces of the body may be curved in the same manner).
Regarding claim 10, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 7. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the port (refer to opening 85 as in fig. 8) is formed from high-density polyethylene (refer to the first para. of the Detailed Description, wherein rigid bladder 10 is made of water-grade high-density polyethylene (HDPE), in the instant case the port 85 is formed as a recessed portion of an outer edge of the body, therefore being formed from the same material).
Regarding claim 11, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 7. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses said body being adapted to contain a substance (water) for providing thermal regulation to a user’s body when the container is adjacent the user’s body and for providing hydration when consumed by the user through the port. Note: the recitations “for providing thermal regulation to a user’s body when the container is adjacent the user’s body” and “for providing hydration when consumed by the user through the port” have been considered recitations of intended use. It has been held that the recitation with respect to the matter in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations.
Regarding claim 12, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 11. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the hose (32) is configured for allowing the user to dispense the substance via the hose.
Regarding claim 13, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 7. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the body (10) has a shape that substantially matches a profile silhouette (refer to page 6, par. 6, wherein an outer face of the body between the two sidewalls is concave so as to better accommodate a back wall of a personal load carriage system, as it flexes around the back of a person; both opposing faces of the body may be curved in the same manner) of the user’s apparel comprising a military body armor (refer to the ballistics armor vest prepared to don the load bearing vest as in fig. 7 as taught by Burwell).
Regarding claim 14, Pritchard discloses an apparatus to be worn by a user (refer to Fig. 10), said apparatus comprising:
a hard plastic container body (10, said body being made of water-grade high-density polyethylene (HDPE)) formed from high-density polyethylene (refer to the first para. of the Detailed Description, wherein rigid bladder 10 is made of water-grade high-density polyethylene (HDPE)) and having a shape that substantially matches a profile silhouette of military body armor, the container body being adapted to receive and contain a substance (water), said container body having a front portion, back portion, top portion (14) and bottom portion (13) integrally formed from a same material (refer to page 5, par. 7), the front portion being connected to the back portion by first (11) and second (12) side walls formed between the top and bottom portions, said container body having a port (refer to opening 85), connected to a hose (32), formed through the bottom portion (13) while the apparatus is worn,
wherein the front, back, top and bottom portions have a structure formed to facilitate bending of the body and contour matching of a user’s torso (refer to page 6, par. 6, wherein an outer face of the body between the two sidewalls is concave so as to better accommodate a back wall of a personal load carriage system (e.g., back-pack) as it flexes around the back of a person carrying the back-pack; both opposing faces of the body may be curved in the same manner).
While Pritchard discloses the container body having the port connected to the hose and formed through the bottom portion while the apparatus is worn, Pritchard fails to explicitly disclose the port being at a lowest point of an interior of the container body.
However, Morris teaches a fluid dispensing container (refer to figs. 1-3), comprising a port (32), connected to a hose (38), formed through a bottom portion, and the port (32) being at a lowest point of an interior of the container body, in order to assist in the complete and full drainage of the fluid being held within the body (hose 36, refer to col. 4, lines 64-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pritchard such that the port is at a lowest point of an interior of the container body in view of the teachings by Morris, in order to assist in complete and full drainage of the fluid held within the body.
While Pritchard as modified discloses the container body, Pritchard as modified fails to explicitly disclose first and second opposite upper side walls that converge towards each other in an upwards direction of the container, and first and second opposite lower side walls that are joined to the first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and that extend parallel to each other.
However, O’Neil teaches an asymmetric body armor (refer to Fig. 1), comprising
a first side wall comprising a first upper side wall (15) and a first lower side wall (13) and
a second side wall comprising a second upper side wall (16) and a second lower side
wall (14), the first and second upper side walls converge towards each other in an upwards direction (refer to Fig. 1), the first and second lower side walls are joined to the
first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and extend parallel to each other (refer to Fig. 1), in order to provide enhanced mobility to a soldier to hoist,
shoulder, aim, and fire a weapon (refer to col. 2, lines 52-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Pritchard such that the container body comprises first and second opposite upper side walls that converge towards each other in an upwards direction of the container, and first and second opposite lower side walls that are joined to the first and second opposite upper side walls, respectively, and that extend parallel to each other in view of the teachings by O’Neil, in order to provide enhanced mobility to a soldier.
While Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the body is configured to be slid
into the military body armor (101), Pritchard as modified fails to explicitly disclose
wherein the body is configured to be slid into the military body armor without using
straps.
However, Burwell further teaches a load bearing vest (refer to figs. 3 and 19),
wherein a body (refer to water bladder 190 including hose 194) is configured to be slid
into the load bearing vest designed for use by military personnel without using straps
(refer to col. 8, lines 4-8, wherein the vest includes a pouch 186 disposed over the rear
panel of the vest, the pouch being sized to accommodate the body 190 for retaining
drinking fluid, the bladder disposed in the pouch, and the drinking hose extending from
the bladder), in order to provide a load bearing vest for use by military and police
personnel that provides a conveniently located drinking feature (refer to col. 1, lines 20-
23).
One having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration would recognize that by
providing the body to be slid into the military body armor without using straps, it will
facilitate the removal and insertion of the body into the military body armor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Pritchard such that the body is configured to be slid into the military body armor without using straps in view of
the teachings by Burwell, in order to facilitate the removal and insertion of the body into
the military body armor.
Regarding claim 15, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as
disclosed above in the rejection of claim 14. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the port is formed from high-density polyethylene (refer to the first para. of the
Detailed Description, wherein rigid bladder 10 is made of water-grade high-density
polyethylene (HDPE), and in the instant case, the port 85 is formed by a recessed
portion of an outer edge of the body) and facilitates drainage through the port, through the hose of the container while being worn, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the port is located at a point where a bottom wall of the bottom portion connects to the first
side wall, the bottom wall extending from a connection to the second side wall and
sloping towards the point where the bottom wall connects to the first side wall to
facilitate drainage through the port, through the hose, at a lowest point of the container.
However, Morris teaches a fluid dispensing container (refer to figs. 1-3),
comprising a hollow body (5) having a port (32) located at a point where a bottom wall
(30) of a bottom portion connects to a first side wall (62), and wherein the bottom wall
(30) extends from a connection to a second side wall (26) and sloping towards the point
where the bottom wall (30) connects to the first side wall (62), in order to assist in
complete and full drainage of the fluid held within the body as the fluid is passed out of
the port, through a hose (hose 36, refer to col. 4, lines 64-67), at a lowest point of the container (refer to fig.2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Pritchard such that the
port is located at a point where a bottom wall of the bottom portion connects to the first
side wall, the bottom wall extending from a connection to the second side wall and
sloping towards the point where the bottom wall connects to the first side wall to
facilitate drainage through the port, through the hose, at a lowest point of the container
in view of the teachings by Morris, in order to assist in complete and full drainage of the
fluid held within the body.
Regarding claim 16, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as
disclosed above in the rejection of claim 14. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the front and back portions and the first and second side walls are curved in a
same direction between the top and bottom portions (refer to Figs. 4-7) providing the container body with a concave contour to facilitate contour matching of the user’s torso (refer to page 6, par. 6, wherein an outer face of the body between the two sidewalls is
concave so as to better accommodate a back wall of a personal load carriage system
(e.g., back-pack) as it flexes around the back of a person carrying the back-pack; both
opposing faces of the body may be curved in the same manner).
Regarding claim 17, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as
disclosed above in the rejection of claim 14. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the hose (32) is connected to the port (85) for allowing the user to dispense the
substance via the hose.
Regarding claim 18, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as
disclosed above in the rejection of claim 14. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses said hose (32) comprising a valve for allowing the user to drink the substance via the
hose (refer to the 2nd par. of the Background of Invention page 2, wherein a typical
mouth piece includes a bite valve to control the flow of water and a locking valve to
isolate the bladder from the mouthpiece and thereby prevent leakages).
Regarding claim 19, Pritchard as modified meets the claim limitations as
disclosed above in the rejection of claim 14. Further, Pritchard as modified discloses wherein the front and back portions, the first and second opposite upper side walls, and the first and second opposite lower side walls are curved in a same direction between
the top and bottom portions (refer to Figs. 4-7) providing the container body with a
concave contour to facilitate contour matching of the user’s torso (refer to page 6, par.
6, wherein an outer face of the body between the two sidewalls is concave so as to
better accommodate a back wall of a personal load carriage system as it flexes around
the back of a person; both opposing faces of the body may be curved in the same
manner).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 08/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to the Non-Statutory Double Patenting rejection, the explicit rejection was presented in the Non-Final action filed on 02/06/2025. Claims 1-2, 4-7, and 9-19 remain rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 11,653,745.
A. Applicant argues in pages 6-7 of the remarks that the rejections rest on three misidentifications of structure in the cited references; each of the three structures on which the combination depends is, on the face of the reference, something else entirely. Pritchard's "port" is a bolted filter- cartridge access hole in a side wall. Morris's "sloping bottom wall" is an interior partition suspended above his actual bottom wall, and his "first and second side walls" are a hose-storage channel and a back wall. O'Neal's "upper and lower side walls" are segments of the peripheral edge of a solid steel plate. When these three readings are corrected, no prima facie case survives. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive for the following reasons. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
B. Applicant argues in pages 7-8 of the remarks that Pritchard’s opening 85 is a bolted filter-cartridge access hole in a side wall, not a port through the bottom portion. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive for the following reasons. Pritchard describes port 85 as an opening, and under the broadest reasonable interpretation, a port is being considered to be “an opening for intake or exhaust of a fluid”. Said opening 85 is in fluid communication with fluid outlet nozzle 31 as can be seen from fig.9, providing fluid to a drinking tube. Further, the term portion is being considered as “part; bit; section; segment”. As can be seen from fig.8, said port 85 passes through a bottom part, section, or segment of the body, therefore, meeting the limitations of the claim (Pritchard uses reference number 13 for this bottom region).
C. Applicant argues in pages 8-9 of the remarks that Morris has no slopping bottom wall, no low-point, and no first or second side wall of the kind relied upon; the Office relies on Morris for "a port (32) formed at a point where a bottom wall (30) of a bottom portion connects to a first side wall (62)," with "the bottom wall (30) extending from a connection to a second side wall (26)." Morris discloses none of that. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive for the following reasons. Regarding point (1) that element 30 which is defined as an angled planar interior partition fastened and sealed to all of the side walls and front and rear walls, is considered a bottom wall of the container. Absent a special definition the words of the claims have been afforded the broadest reasonable interpretation. Specifically, the term “bottom wall” is being examined as a structure and surface that defines an area. Therefore, element 30, located at a bottom portion of the body is a bottom wall. Regarding points (2) and (3) that elements 26 and 62 are not a side walls, a side wall is a term used to describe the walls that define the sides of a space, therefore, the reference of Morris meets the limitations of the claims. The required and claimed front, back, top and bottom portions of the body have already been disclosed by Pritchard, and the reference of Morris teaches that it is known to provide an angled bottom wall as claimed.
D. Applicant argues in pages 8-9 of the remarks that re-sloping Pritchard’s bottom to a low-point drain would change its principle of operation and defeat its purpose. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive for the following reasons. The obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, sloping the bottom wall in order to assist in the complete and full drainage of the fluid being held within the body as the fluid is passed out of the port, to the hose, does not change the principle of operation of Pritchard.
E. Applicant argues in pages 10-11 that O’Neal discloses edge segments of a solid plate, not upper and lower side walls of a hollow body; O’Neal teaches edges; these are not walls and O’Neal has no hollow body. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive for the following reasons. The reference of O’Neal has been provided to show that it is known in the art to provide a body armor having the walls as claimed as in fig.1.
F. Applicant argues in pages 10-11 that there is no rational reason to graft O’Neal’s outline onto Pritchard, and doing so would destroy Pritchard. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive for the following reasons. The obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the shapes of the walls would not change its principle of operation.
G. Applicant argues in page 12 that Burwell does not cure the deficiencies and teaches nothing about retaining a rigid body without straps. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive for the following reasons. The reference of Burwell has been provided to show that it is known in the art to support a container body without using straps.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANA M VAZQUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0611. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/ANA M VAZQUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
