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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3 June 2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 3 June 2026. These drawings are acceptable.
The drawings are objected to because D.sub.1 of figure 26 no longer depicts the radial distance across the rim.
The drawings are objected to because 106 does not indicate the sidewall in figure 38.
The drawings are objected to because 190 is not directed to the second outer end edge in figure 3.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 508. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 14 be found allowable, claim 19 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 15-17, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dees (US 20020175164).
Claim 1: Dees discloses a container comprising food containers 10 & 36 (first tray and a second tray), the container 10 (first tray) being releasably engageable with the container 36 (second tray) when the container 36 (second tray) is inverted relative to the container 10 (first tray), each container 10 & 36 (tray) having a substantially identical profile, for each container 10 & 36 (tray): the container 10 & 36 (tray) comprising a planar container portion 12 (cover portion), a rim portion 16 (peripheral rim), and a sidewall 14 extending between and coupling the planar container portion 12 (cover portion) and the rim portion 16 (rim); the rim portion 16 (rim) comprising a proximal segment, a bead segment, and an outer rim portion 76 (distal segment), the proximal segment extending outwardly from the sidewall 14 to the bead segment and the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) extending outwardly from the bead segment; the bead segment comprising an undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) and a male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member); the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) defining a first cavity and comprising a medial portion 70 (upper bead) spaced above the proximal segment and oriented substantially parallel to the proximal segment a first inner wall extending upwardly from the proximal segment to the medial portion 70 (upper bead) at a first angle and a first outer wall extending downwardly from the medial portion 70 (upper bead) to the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) at a second angle, wherein the first angle is an acute angle and is different from the second angle to define an asymmetrical profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) that tapers outward along the first inner wall from the proximal segment to the medial portion 70 (upper bead); and the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) defining a second cavity and comprising a medial portion 66 (lower bead) spaced below the proximal segment; wherein, when the container 10 (first tray) engages the container 36 (second tray) inverted relative to the container 10 (first tray), the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) is received in the second cavity of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) and engages the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray), and the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) is received in the second cavity of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) and engages the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray); and wherein, when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation, movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another is limited by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) (see annotated fig. 1A and 4 below and fig. 1B).
The container of Dees inherently limits movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation as the prior art discloses a structurally identical container to the inventions claimed container, as the prior art discloses a sidewall 14 of the container 36 (second tray) which is sized and shaped to enable the sidewall 14 of the container 36 (second tray) to be substantially received in the interior of the container 10 (first tray) a sufficient depth without limiting downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative the container 10 (first tray) identically to the inventions disclosed sidewall, and as the prior art discloses a first inner wall extending at an oblique angle such that the medial portion 70 (upper bead) extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment and such that when the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the container 10 (first tray) and the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray) occurs to limit downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative to the container 10 (first tray) and a second inner wall extends at an oblique angle such that the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the container 36 (second tray) extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) such that when the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the container 36 (second tray) and the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) occurs to limit downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative to the container 10 (first tray) identically to the inventions disclosure that the first inner wall 144 may extend at the oblique angle a such that the upper bead 122 extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment 110 and such that, when the trays 102a and 102b are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the upper bead 122 of the first tray 102a and the proximal segment 110 of the second tray 102b occurs to limit downward movement of the second tray relative to the first tray and that the second inner wall 148 may extend at the oblique angle <p such that the lower bead 126 extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment 110 and such that, when the trays 102a and 102b are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the lower bead 126 of the second tray 102b and the proximal segment 110 of the first tray 102a occurs to limit downward movement of the second tray relative to the first tray. If there is any difference, the difference must be minor and obvious. The burden is shifted to applicants to show that movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another is not limited by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation. Otherwise a prima facie case of anticipation has been established.
PNG
media_image1.png
429
571
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
362
494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Dees discloses wherein, for each container 10 & 36 (tray), the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) extends between inclined male transition surfaces 26 & 28 (first and second ends) and the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) extends between inclined female transition surfaces 29 & 30 (first and second ends), the inclined female transition surface 30 (first end) of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) being located proximate the inclined male transition surface 26 (second end) of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member), the inclined female transition surface 29 (second end) of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) being located proximate the inclined male transition surface 28 (first end) of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) (see fig. 1A).
Claim 3: Dees discloses wherein the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) and the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) extend an approximately equal distance between the respective inclined male transition surfaces 26 & 28 and inclined female transition surfaces 29 & 30 (first and second ends) (see fig. 1A).
Claim 4: Dees discloses wherein the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) and the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) each extend continuously between the respective inclined male transition surfaces 26 & 28 and inclined female transition surfaces 29 & 30 (first and second ends) (see fig. 1A).
Claim 7: Dees discloses wherein, when the container 10 (first tray) engages the container 36 (second tray), the sidewalls 14 and the planar container portion 12 (cover portions) define an interior volume of the container, and the proximal segment of the rim portions 16 (rims) of the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) are in face-to-face contact to substantially seal the interior volume (see fig. 1B and 4).
Claim 15: Dees discloses a container comprising food containers 10 & 36 (first tray and a second tray), the container 10 (first tray) being releasably engageable with the container 36 (second tray) when the container 36 (second tray) is inverted relative to the container 10 (first tray), each container 10 & 36 (tray) having a substantially identical profile, for each container 10 & 36 (tray): the container 10 & 36 (tray) comprising a planar container portion 12 (cover portion), a rim portion 16 (peripheral rim), and a sidewall 14 extending between and coupling the planar container portion 12 (cover portion) and the rim portion 16 (rim); the rim portion 16 (rim) comprising a proximal segment, a bead segment, and an outer rim portion 76 (distal segment), the proximal segment extending outwardly from the sidewall 14 to the bead segment the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) extending outwardly from the bead segment opposite the proximal segment; the bead segment comprising an undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) and a male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member); the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member); the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment comprising a first inner wall extending upwardly from the proximal segment to a medial portion 70 (upper bead) at a first angle, the medial portion 70 (upper bead) oriented substantially parallel to the proximal segment, and a first outer wall extending downwardly from the medial portion 70 (upper bead) to the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) at a second angle, wherein the first angle is an acute angle and is different from the second angle to define an asymmetrical profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) that tapers outward along the first inner wall from the proximal segment to the medial portion 70 (upper bead); wherein the first inner wall, the medial portion 70 (upper bead), and the first outer wall define a first cavity, wherein a greater distance is defined between the first inner wall and the first outer wall proximate the medial portion 70 (upper bead) than a distance defined between the first inner wall and the first outer wall proximate an opening to the first cavity; and the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) of the bead segment comprising a second inner wall extending downwardly from the proximal segment to a medial portion 66 (lower bead) and a second outer wall extending upwardly from the medial portion 66 (lower bead) to the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment), wherein the second inner wall, the medial portion 66 (lower bead), and the second outer wall define a second cavity, wherein a greater distance is defined between the second inner wall and the second outer wall proximate the medial portion 66 (lower bead) than a distance defined between the second inner wall and the second outer wall proximate an opening to the second cavity; wherein, when the container 10 (first tray) engages the container 36 (second tray) inverted relative to the container 10 (first tray) at a first angle, the: the medial portion 70 (upper bead), the first inner wall, and the first outer wall of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) are received in the second cavity of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) and the first inner wall of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the container 10 (first tray) engages the second inner wall of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) of the container 36 (second tray) by friction,
and the medial portion 70 (upper bead), the first inner wall, and the first outer wall of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) are received in the second cavity of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) and the first inner wall of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the container 36 (second tray) engages the second inner wall of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) of the container 10 (first tray) by friction; wherein, when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation, movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another is limited by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging at least one of the proximal segment of the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging at least one of the proximal segment and the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) of the container 10 (first tray) (see annotated fig. 1A and 4 above and fig. 1B).
The container of Dees inherently limits movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging at least one of the proximal segment and the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging at least one of the proximal segment and the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) of the container 10 (first tray) when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation as the prior art discloses a structurally identical container to the inventions claimed container, as the prior art discloses a sidewall 14 of the container 36 (second tray) which is sized and shaped to enable the sidewall 14 of the container 36 (second tray) to be substantially received in the interior of the container 10 (first tray) a sufficient depth without limiting downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative the container 10 (first tray) identically to the inventions disclosed sidewall, and as the prior art discloses a first inner wall extending at an oblique angle such that the medial portion 70 (upper bead) extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment and such that when the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the container 10 (first tray) and the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray) occurs to limit downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative to the container 10 (first tray) and a second inner wall extends at an oblique angle such that the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the container 36 (second tray) extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) such that when the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the container 36 (second tray) and the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) occurs to limit downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative to the container 10 (first tray) identically to the inventions disclosure that the first inner wall 144 may extend at the oblique angle a such that the upper bead 122 extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment 110 and such that, when the trays 102a and 102b are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the upper bead 122 of the first tray 102a and the proximal segment 110 of the second tray 102b occurs to limit downward movement of the second tray relative to the first tray and that the second inner wall 148 may extend at the oblique angle <p such that the lower bead 126 extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment 110 and such that, when the trays 102a and 102b are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the lower bead 126 of the second tray 102b and the proximal segment 110 of the first tray 102a occurs to limit downward movement of the second tray relative to the first tray. If there is any difference, the difference must be minor and obvious. The burden is shifted to applicants to show that movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another is not limited by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging at least one of the proximal segment and the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging at least one of the proximal segment and the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) of the container 10 (first tray) when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation. Otherwise a prima facie case of anticipation has been established.
Claim 16: Dees discloses wherein, for the bead segment of each container 10 & 36 (tray): the first inner wall of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) extends upwardly from the proximal segment to the medial portion 70 (upper bead) at an oblique angle, relative to the proximal segment, towards the sidewall 14 such that the greater distance between the first inner wall and the first outer wall is defined proximate the medial portion 70 (upper bead), and the second inner wall of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) extends downwardly from the proximal segment to the medial portion 66 (lower bead) at an oblique angle, relative to the proximal segment, towards the sidewall 14 such that the greater distance between the second inner wall and the second outer wall is defined proximate the medial portion 66 (lower bead) (see annotated fig. 4 above).
Claim 17: Dees discloses wherein the first inner wall extends at approximately the same oblique angle as the second inner wall (see annotated fig. 4 above).
Claim 21: Dees discloses wherein the sidewalls 14 of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are shaped such that, when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation, downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative to the container 10 (first tray) is not limited by frictional engagement between the sidewalls 36 (see fig. 1A).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees (US 20020175164) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yeager (US 5353935).
Claim 14: Dees discloses the claimed invention except wherein, for each tray, the sidewall includes at least one outwardly-extending denesting lug adjacent the proximal segment, and wherein, when the first tray and the second tray are stacked in the same orientation, the at least one denesting lug of the second tray engages the rim of the first tray to limit movement of the first tray and the second tray relative to one another.
Yeager teaches a package 20 having a sidewall and rear flange 48, wherein the sidewall includes at least one outwardly-extending denesting lug 60 adjacent the rear flange 48, and wherein, when packages 20 are stacked in the same orientation, the at least one denesting lug 60 of one cover 20 engages the rear flange 48 of another package 20 to limit movement of the packages 20 relative to one another (see fig. 1 and 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified each container 10 & 36 (tray) to have at least one outwardly-extending denesting lug 60 on the sidewall 14 and adjacent the proximal segment, as taught by Yeager, in order to space apart stacked containers 10 & 36 (trays) to permit a user or machine to more readily grasp individual containers 10 & 36 (trays).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees (US 20020175164) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Yeager (US 5353935).
Claim 18: See claim 14 above.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees (US 20020175164) further in view of Yeager (US 5353935).
Claim 19: Dees discloses a container comprising food containers 10 & 36 (first tray and a second tray), the container 10 (first tray) being releasably engageable with the container 36 (second tray) when the container 36 (second tray) is inverted relative to the container 10 (first tray), each container 10 & 36 (tray) having a substantially identical profile, for each container 10 & 36 (tray): the container 10 & 36 (tray) comprising a planar container portion 12 (cover portion), a rim portion 16 (peripheral rim), and a sidewall 14 extending between and coupling the planar container portion 12 (cover portion) and the rim portion 16 (rim); the rim portion 16 (rim) comprising a proximal segment, a bead segment, and an outer rim portion 76 (distal segment), the proximal segment extending outwardly from the sidewall 14 to the bead segment and the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) extending outwardly from the bead segment; the bead segment comprising an undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) and a male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member), wherein the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) defines a first cavity and comprises a medial portion 70 (upper bead) spaced above the proximal segment and oriented substantially parallel to the proximal segment, the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) further comprising, a first inner wall extending upwardly from the proximal segment to the medial portion 70 (upper bead) at a first angle and a first outer wall extending downwardly from the medial portion 70 (upper bead) to the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) at a second angle, wherein the first angle is an acute angle and is different from the second angle to define an asymmetrical profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) that tapers outward along the first inner wall from the proximal segment to the medial portion 70 (upper bead); and wherein the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) defines a second cavity and comprises a medial portion 66 (lower bead) spaced below the proximal segment; wherein, when the container 10 (first tray) engages the container 36 (second tray) inverted relative to the container 10 (first tray), the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) is received in the second cavity of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) and engages the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray), and the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) is received in the second cavity of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) and engages the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray); and wherein, when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation, movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another is limited by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) (see annotated fig. 1A and 4 below and fig. 1B).
The container of Dees inherently limits movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation as the prior art discloses a structurally identical container to the inventions claimed container, as the prior art discloses a sidewall 14 of the container 36 (second tray) which is sized and shaped to enable the sidewall 14 of the container 36 (second tray) to be substantially received in the interior of the container 10 (first tray) a sufficient depth without limiting downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative the container 10 (first tray) identically to the inventions disclosed sidewall, and as the prior art discloses a first inner wall extending at an oblique angle such that the medial portion 70 (upper bead) extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment and such that when the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the container 10 (first tray) and the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray) occurs to limit downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative to the container 10 (first tray) and a second inner wall extends at an oblique angle such that the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the container 36 (second tray) extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) such that when the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the container 36 (second tray) and the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) occurs to limit downward movement of the container 36 (second tray) relative to the container 10 (first tray) identically to the inventions disclosure that the first inner wall 144 may extend at the oblique angle a such that the upper bead 122 extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment 110 and such that, when the trays 102a and 102b are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the upper bead 122 of the first tray 102a and the proximal segment 110 of the second tray 102b occurs to limit downward movement of the second tray relative to the first tray and that the second inner wall 148 may extend at the oblique angle <p such that the lower bead 126 extends a sufficient distance over the proximal segment 110 and such that, when the trays 102a and 102b are stacked in the same orientation, sufficient engagement between the lower bead 126 of the second tray 102b and the proximal segment 110 of the first tray 102a occurs to limit downward movement of the second tray relative to the first tray. If there is any difference, the difference must be minor and obvious. The burden is shifted to applicants to show that movement of the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) relative to one another is not limited by at least one of: i) the medial portion 70 (upper bead) of the bead segment of the container 10 (first tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 36 (second tray), and ii) the medial portion 66 (lower bead) of the bead segment of the container 36 (second tray) engaging the proximal segment of the container 10 (first tray) when the container 10 (first tray) and the container 36 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation. Otherwise a prima facie case of anticipation has been established.
Dees does not disclose the sidewall including at least one outwardly-extending denesting lug located adjacent the proximal segment of the rim; and wherein, when the first tray and the second tray are stacked in a same orientation, movement of the first tray and the second tray relative to one another is limited by the at least one denesting lug of the second tray engaging the rim of the first tray.
Yeager teaches a package 20 having a sidewall and rear flange 48, wherein the sidewall includes at least one outwardly-extending denesting lug 60 adjacent the rear flange 48, and wherein, when packages 20 are stacked in the same orientation, the at least one denesting lug 60 of one cover 20 engages the rear flange 48 of another package 20 to limit movement of the packages 20 relative to one another (see fig. 1 and 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified each container 210 (tray) to have at least one outwardly-extending denesting lug 60 on the sidewall 214 and adjacent the rim portion 254 (proximal segment), as taught by Yeager, in order to space apart stacked containers 210 (trays) to permit a user or machine to more readily grasp individual containers 210 (trays).
Claim 20: The combination discloses wherein, for each container 10 & 36 (tray), at least one denesting lug 60 extends a height along the sidewall 14 away from the proximal segment, the height of the at least one denesting lug 60 defining a denesting height between the outer rim portion 76 (distal segments) of the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) when the containers 10 & 36 (first and second trays) are stacked in the same orientation that enables a user to grasp the outer rim portion 76 (distal segments) individually (see fig. 6 ‘935).
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees (US 20020175164) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Pohlman (US 20190344936).
Claim 8: Dees does not disclose wherein at least one vent channel is defined in the rim of at least one of the first tray and the second tray, and wherein the at least one vent channel is in communication with the interior volume when the first tray engages the second tray.
Pohlman teaches a container 1 that includes a lid 2 and base 3, wherein one or more vent channels 50 are formed in either or both of the lid rim 4 or base rim 5, wherein the vent channels 50 are in communication with an interior volume of the container when the lid 2 engages the base 3, and wherein the vent channels 50 are defined in a top segment 14 and terminate prior to a peripheral edge of the top segment (see fig. 1, 3, & 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the rim portion 16 (rim) of at least one of the containers 10 & 36 (first tray and second tray) to have a vent channel 50 that terminates prior to a peripheral edge of the rim portion 16 (rim) and that is in communication with the interior volume when the container 10 (first tray) engages the container 36 (second tray), as taught by Pohlman, in order to permit to allow egress of gases and vapors upon pressure in the container reaching a certain level without manually repositioning the containers 10 & 36 (first tray and second tray).
Claim 9: The combination discloses wherein the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) defines a peripheral edge of the rim portion 16 (rim), wherein the at least one vent channel 50 is defined in the outer rim portion 76 (distal segment) (see fig. 3 & 6 ‘936).
Claim 10: The combination discloses wherein the at least one vent channel 50 terminates prior to the peripheral edge of the rim portion 216 (rim) (see fig. 3 & 6 ‘936).
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees (US 20040144781) further in view of Dees (US 20020175164).
Claim 1: Dees discloses a container comprising a first container 10 (first tray) and a second container 12 (second tray), the first container 10 (first tray) being releasably engageable with the second container 12 (second tray) when the second container 12 (second tray) is inverted relative to the first container 10 (first tray), each first and second container 10, 12 (tray) having a substantially identical profile, for each first and second container 10, 12 (tray): the first and second container 10, 12 (tray) comprising a flat portion 24 (cover portion), a peripheral rim 15, and a sidewall 13 extending between and coupling the flat portion 24 (cover portion) and the rim 15; the rim 15 comprising a proximal segment, a bead segment, and a distal segment, and the distal segment extending outwardly from the bead segment; the proximal segment extending outwardly from the sidewall 13 to the bead segment; the bead segment comprising a male ridge section 16 (upwardly-extending member) and a female groove section 18 (downwardly-extending member); the male ridge section 16 (upwardly-extending member) defining a first cavity and comprising an upper bead spaced above the proximal segment and oriented substantially parallel to the proximal segment; a first inner wall extending upwardly from the proximal segment to the upper bead at a first angle and a first outer wall extending downwardly from the upper bead to the distal segment at a second angle, wherein the first angle is an acute angle; and the female groove section 18 (downwardly-extending member) defining a second cavity and comprising a lower bead spaced below the proximal segment; wherein, when the first container 10 (first tray) engages the second container 12 (second tray) inverted relative to the first container 10 (first tray), the male ridge section 16 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the first container 10 (first tray) is received in the second cavity of the bead segment of the second container 12 (second tray) and engages the female groove section 18 (downwardly- extending member) of the bead segment of the second container 12 (second tray), and the male ridge section 16 (upwardly-extending member) of the bead segment of the second container 12 (second tray) is received in the second cavity of the bead segment of the first container 10 (first tray) and engages the female groove section 18 (downwardly- extending member) of the bead segment of the first container 10 (first tray); and wherein, when the first container 10 (first tray) and the second container 12 (second tray) are stacked in a same orientation, movement of the first container 10 (first tray) and the second container 12 (second tray) relative to one another is limited by at least one of: i) the upper bead of the bead segment of the first container 10 (first tray) engaging the proximal segment of the second container 12 (second tray), and ii) the lower bead of the bead segment of the second container 12 (second tray) engaging the proximal segment of the first container 10 (first tray) (see fig. 4 and annotated fig. 1, 3A, and 4A below).
Dees ‘781 discloses a prior art container having all the recited structure, but which differs from the claimed device in that male ridge section 16 (upwardly-extending member) engaging the female groove section 18 (downwardly-extending member) does not have a first inner wall at a first angle that is different from the second angle of a first outer wall to define an asymmetrical profile of the male ridge section 16 (upwardly-extending member) that tapers outward along the first inner wall from the proximal segment to the upper bead. Dees ‘164 discloses a prior art container having engaging undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) and male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) having the claimed profile (see claim 1 above). The substitution of one known element (the profile of undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) and male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) as shown in annotated fig. 4 above) for another (profile of male ridge section 16 (upwardly-extending member) and female groove section 18 (downwardly-extending member) as shown in fig. 4A) would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since the substitution of the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) and male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) in Dees would have yielded predictable results, namely, engagement of the containers 10 & 12 (trays) in Dees to seal the container closed.
PNG
media_image3.png
646
574
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
352
320
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
470
396
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: The combination discloses wherein, for each first and second container 10, 12 (tray), the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) extends between first and second ends and the female groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly-extending member) extends between first and second ends, the first end of the groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly- extending member) being located proximate the second end of the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member), the second end of the groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly- extending member) being located proximate the first end of the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) (see annotated fig. 1 ‘781 above).
Claim 7: Dees discloses wherein, when the first container 10 (first tray) engages the second container 12 (second tray), the sidewalls 13 and the flat portions 24 (cover portions) define an interior volume of the container, and the proximal segments of the rims 15 of the first and second container 10, 12 (first and second trays) are in face-to-face contact to substantially seal the interior volume (see annotated fig. 1 above and fig. 4).
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees (US 20040144781) and Dees (US 20020175164) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Mannix (US 3835281).
Claim 5: Dees discloses wherein, when the first container 10 (first tray) engages the second container 12 (second tray), the sidewalls 13 and the flat portions 24 (cover portions) define an interior volume of the container, the proximal segments of the rims 15 of the first container 10 and second container 12 (first and second trays) are in face-to-face contact to substantially seal the interior volume, wherein the rim 15 has a planar portion between the first end of the female groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly- extending member) and the second end of the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) and between the second end of the female groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly- extending member) and the first end of the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) (see annotated fig. 1 above).
Dees does not disclose wherein the rim of at least one of the first tray and the second tray defines at least one vent channel that is in communication with the interior volume when the first tray engages the second tray.
Mannix teaches a container 10 formed by first and second container elements 12 and 14 which are substantially mirror images of each other, wherein container elements 12 & 14 have a planar sealing rim 20 which have grooves 42 (vent channels) in communication with an interior volume when the first container element 12 engages the second container element 14 (see fig. 1, 3, and C. 58-62 & C. 4 L. 27-31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the planar portions of the rims 15 of the first container 10 and second container 12 (first and second trays) to have grooves 42 (vent channels), as taught by Mannix, in order to permit the internal pressure to be vented to the exterior of the container.
Claim 6: The combination discloses wherein, for each first and second container 10, 12 (tray), the grooves 42 (vent channels) extend between the first end of the female groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly- extending member) and the second end of the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) or between the second end of the female groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly- extending member) and the first end of the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) (see annotated fig. 1 above and fig. 1 & 3 ‘281).
Claim(s) 8, 9, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees (US 20040144781) and Dees (US 20020175164) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Mannix (US 3835281).
Claim 8: Dees discloses wherein the rim 15 has a planar portion between the first end of the female groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly- extending member) and the second end of the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) and between the second end of the female groove section 18 having the profile of the male undercut ridge section 20 (downwardly- extending member) and the first end of the male ridge section 16 having the profile of the undercut rim portion 40 (upwardly-extending member) (see annotated fig. 1 above).
Dees does not disclose wherein at least one vent channel is defined in the rim of at least one of the first tray and the second tray, and wherein the at least one vent channel is in communication with the interior volume when the first tray engages the second tray.
Mannix teaches a container 10 formed by first and second container elements 12 and 14 which are substantially mirror images of each other, wherein container elements 12 & 14 have a planar sealing rim 20 which have grooves 42 (vent channels) in communication with an interior volume when the first container element 12 engages the second container element 14, wherein grooves 42 (vent channels) in the first container element 12 are aligned with grooves 42 (vent channels) in the second container element (see fig. 1, 3, and C. 58-62 & C. 4 L. 27-31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the planar portions of the rims 15 of the first container 10 and second container 12 (first and second trays) to have aligned grooves 42 (vent channels), as taught by Mannix, in order to permit the internal pressure to be vented to the exterior of the container.
Claim 9: The combination discloses wherein the rim 15 of each first and second container 10, 12 (tray) has a distal segment extending outwardly from the bead segment opposite the proximal segment, the distal segment defining a peripheral edge of the rim 15, wherein the grooves 42 (vent channels) are defined in the distal segment (see annotated fig. 1 above and fig. 1 & 3 ‘281).
Claim 12: The combination discloses wherein at least one groove 42 (first vent channel) is defined in the rim 15 of the first container 10 (first tray) and at least one groove 42 (second vent channel) is defined in the rim 15 of the second container 12 (second tray), wherein each of the at least one groove 42 (first vent channel) and the at least one groove 42 (second vent channel) is in communication with the interior volume when the first container 10 (first tray) engages the second container 12 (second tray) (see fig. 1 & 3 ‘281).
Claim 13: The combination discloses wherein the at least one groove 42 (first vent channel) is aligned with the at least one groove 42 (second vent channel) when the first container 10 (first tray) engages the second container 12 (second tray) (see fig. 1 & 3 ‘281).
Response to Arguments
The drawing objections in paragraphs 3-5 and 9 of office action dated 3 February 2026 are withdrawn in light of the amended disclosure filed 3 June 2026.
The specification objections in paragraphs 11-12 of office action dated 3 February 2026 are withdrawn in light of the amended disclosure filed 3 June 2026.
Applicant’s arguments filed 3 June 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 15 under 102 and claim 19 under 103 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 a different embodiment of Dees (US 20020175164) and additionally in view of Dees (US 20040144781) further in view of Dees (US 20020175164).
In response to applicant’s argument that figure 26 is amended to correct the line D.sub.1, the Examiner replies that the arrow associated with D.sub.1 is not double ended and does not extend the full radial distance across the rim.
In response to applicant’s argument that figure 38 was amended to move the line for reference 106, the Examiner responds that no such change was made.
In response to applicant’s argument that figure 49 was amended to add reference 508, the Examiner responds that no such change was made.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLAN D STEVENS whose telephone number is (571)270-7798. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 12-8 ET.
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.
/ALLAN D STEVENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights