DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/26/2026 has been entered.
Claims 20 and 22-30 are presented for examination
This action is Non-Final
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Line 15 of claim 20 states “…a gate centered on the longitudinal axis and a wall extending from the gate…” Applicants specification fails to identify the wall extending from the gate. There are rings surrounding the gate including a dome but it is unclear of a wall extending from the gate. Appropriate action is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 20 and 24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 21-24, 29, 32 and 35-37 of U.S. Patent No. 12,540,001 in view of Lepoitevin (US D663,621). See chart analysis below.
Application 18/369,048
Issued Application 18/179,241
20. A plastic container comprising: a base including
a plurality of strap rips extending from a central portion of the base to a base perimeter about a longitudinal axis, and
a plurality of feet formed between the strap ribs and presenting a resting surface of the plastic container; and
a sidewall comprising a grip portion extending from the base to a label panel, the sidewall having a plurality of circumferentially positioned ribs, wherein each rib of the plurality of circumferentially positioned ribs angulates around the grip portion and includes a first depth portion that transitions in the circumferential direction to a second depth portion of lesser depth, and wherein at least the second depth portions of three circumferentially positioned ribs are aligned in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis,
wherein each first depth portion has a depth relative to the sidewall of at least 1.2 mm.
21. A container comprising:
a flat foot base centered on a central axis of the container;
a sidewall connected to the base and defining
a portion of an interior of the container;
a plurality of strap rips positioned in the base, each one of which extends radially outward toward the sidewall; and
angulating and varying depth sidewall ribs extending along a periphery of the sidewall and radially inset therefrom, wherein each varying depth rib includes shallow sections and deep sections, the shallow sections having a rib depth less than a rib depth of the deep sections in a circumferential direction,
wherein in the direction of the central axis the shallow sections of the varying depth ribs are aligned to form recessed columns and unaligned with deep sections of the varying depth sidewall ribs,
wherein at least one strap rib is aligned with at least one recessed column.
35. The sidewall of claim 21, wherein the rib depth of the deep
sections of each sidewall rib is at least 1.5 millimeters.
24. The plastic container of claim 20, wherein each first depth portion has a depth relative to the sidewall of at least 1.5 mm.
35. The sidewall of claim 21, wherein the rib depth of the deep sections of each sidewall rib is at least 1.5 millimeters.
The issued patent fails to disclose the following limitations but are taught by a Lepoitevin:
plurality of feet formed between the strap ribs and presenting a resting surface of the plastic container; and
a sidewall comprising a grip portion extending from the base to a label panel, the sidewall having a plurality of circumferentially positioned ribs (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
378
437
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Appropriate action is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-23 and 25-39 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAVEN COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-1672. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ANTHONY STASHICK can be reached at 571-272-4561. 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.
/RAVEN COLLINS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights