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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/30/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The status of the claim(s) is as follows:
Claim 1 has been amended,
Claims 2-8, 10-12, 14-15 were previously presented,
Claims 9 and 13 has been canceled,
Please note: claims 10-11 and 14 were and still are withdrawn from further consideration from restriction mailed on 01/13/2025, applicant should change the claim indicator from “(original)” to” (withdrawn)”.
Therefore, claims 1-8, 12 and 15 are currently pending in this application.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snyder (11,918,040) in view of Whiteford (6,086,931).
As to claim 1, Snyder discloses a smoking system (100) comprising: a container (104) having at least one inner chamber (120, 114, 116),a lid member (102) for covering and providing an air seal for the inner chamber (seal 109 provide the seal to the inner chamber), the lid member constructed and arranged for suitable connection to the container (104) to provide for the air seal while also allowing the lid member (102) to be moved between an open position and a closed position (Figures 1 and 13), a smoking implement (smoking device 112) sized to fit inside of the inner chamber (compartment 116) of the container (104) and the lid member (102) when the lid member (102) is in a closed position, the smoking implement extending out of the inner chamber for manual grasping when the lid member is in an open position (the biased spring push the smoking implement 112 out of the compartment),pre-ground and cleaned smoking material (smokable herb) within the inner chamber (120) ,wherein the smoking system (100) is purchased ready to use. However, Snyder does not disclose a heat seal attached across a top surface of the inner chamber, the heat seal removable to provide access to the content of the inner chamber, the heat seal constructed from a material that is resistant to allowing air into the container and moisture out of the container. Nevertheless, Whiteford discloses a food product container (10) with inner compartment, the inner compartment further comprises peel-off top seal (30) that releasably affixed to the container using heat-melt application or using adhesive (column 3, lines 1-11 teaches that the gas impermeable metal foil is heat-sealed to the flange 12), the heat seal removable by peel off the foil to provide access to the article (20), the heat seal constructed from a material that is resistant to allowing air into the container and moisture out of the container (the closed receptacle insulates the article from the air and inhibits evaporation of moisture and escape of carbon dioxide from the product, claim 1, which clearly discloses that the foil that resistant to allow air into the container and moisture out of the container). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inner compartment of Snyder with heat sealing peel off seal foil material as taught by Whiteford in order to keep the content of smoking herb inside the compartment fresh and maintain the aroma and the condition of the smoking herb stay in prime condition prior peeling off the seal.
As to claim 2, Snyder as modified further discloses the heat seal secured across a top surface of the inner chamber is constructed and arranged to be removable by hand to provide access to the smoking material (easily peel-off taught by Whiteford).
As to claim 3, Snyder as modified further discloses the lid member (102) is a convex lid member (the seal 109 extend and bulge outward from the inner portion of the lid, best seem in Figure 13), the convex lid member (102) includes a stem (structure of the seal) sized to fit inside or outside of a container wall (120) and adjacent thereto to provide an air seal to the inner chamber (120) of the container (104) and to hold the convex lid member (102) in position with respect to the container (104).
As to claim 6, Snyder as modified further discloses the container includes a divider wall (a wall is show between the compartment 120 and 116 of Figure 16) for separating the smoking implement (112) with respect to the smoking material (herb inside compartment 120) inside of the container (104).
As to claim 7, Snyder as modified further discloses a poker (110) contained within the container (104) and lid (102) for clearing a smoke aperture of the smoking implement (the multi-tool 110 can be use to clean the smoke aperture of the smoking implement ( 112).
As to claim 15, Snyder further discloses the lid member (14) includes a rubber seal (column 7, lines 43-50).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snyder (11,918,040) and Whiteford (6,086,931), further in view of Zahr et al (2016/0167846).
As to claim 4-5, Snyder as modified does not disclose the lid is constructure to rotate about a pivot pin between the open and close positions, the pivot pin is provided with a spring member which provides closing pressure on the convex lid member. Nevertheless Zahr discloses a e-liquid dispenser with a body (102) and a lid (104), the lid is attached to the body via hinge assembly (150), the hinge assembly further comprises a roll pin (166), to hold and rotatably secure the lid (104) to the housing (102), a torsion spring (160) to provide a slight spring tension to keep the lid (104) in the closed position when closed and in an open position when open, such that the lid is retained in the closed position but may be easily opened and closed by the user, as required [0055]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hinge assembly of Snyder with spring-biased hinge assembly as taught by Zahr in order to keep the lid in the closed position when closed and in an open position when open, such that the lid is retained in the closed position but may be easily opened and closed by the user, as required.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snyder (11,918,040) and Whiteford (6,086,931), further in view of Castleberry (3,365,102).
As to claim 8, Snyder as modified does not disclose the smoking implement includes a threaded portion and a body portion, allowing the smoking implement to be shortened for storage and lengthened for use. Nevertheless Castleberry discloses a smoking apparatus (Figure 2) comprises a threaded portion (18) and the body portion, allowing the smoking implement to be shortened and separated for storage and lengthened for use. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the smoking implement of Snyder with threaded portion as taught by Castleberry in order to provide easy separate of the smoking implement for easier to clean the inner channel and pipe.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snyder (11,918,040) and Whiteford (6,086,931) in view of Basso et al (20240307636).
As to claim 12, Snyder as modified does not disclose the amount of smoking material use in the smoking implement and the smoking implement is a taster constructed and arranged to hold one tenth of a gram of smoking material or less. Nevertheless, Basso discloses a portable vaporizer, the vaporizer cartridges can hold dry good of 0.1 grams and wet good can hold a range of 0.01 grams to 0.25 grams. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the smoking implement of Snyder with small amount of volume of the smoking material as taught by Basso in order to reduce amount of nicotine intake while enjoy the smoking.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-8, 12 and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN HOI CHEUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-5702. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM-5:30PM.
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, Orlando E Aviles can be reached at (571)270-5531. 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.
/CHUN HOI CHEUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736