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 .
This action is written in response to the amendment filed 05/21/2026
Claims 1, 5-6 and 10 have been amended and claim 4 has been cancelled
Claims 1-3, 5-15 and 17-20 are presented for examination
This action is Final
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 5-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu (US 2020/0407100) in view of Berk et al. (US 9,505,521).
Claim 1. Hsu discloses a bottle, comprising:
a tubular body portion 30 formed substantially from paper, having a first open end and a second open end (abstract; fig. 1);
a shoulder portion 22 joined at the first open end of the tubular body portion the shoulder portion providing a transition from the tubular body portion to a neck portion @221 configured for receiving a closure [0032]; and
a base portion 40 joined at the second open end of the tubular body portion [0031].
Hsu fails to disclose a two-part shoulder portion. Berk teaches wherein the shoulder portion comprises a two-part construction, namely:
a reinforcing inner shoulder 420, formed substantially from paper as a separate component, joined to the tubular body portion at a continuous peripheral connection connecting edge thereof at the first open end (col. 5-6, ll. 65-67, 1-10; fig. 8); and
an outer shoulder 430’ formed substantially from paper as a separate component, joined to at least one of the inner shoulder or tubular body portion, the outer shoulder being configured to cover the inner shoulder (col. 5-6, ll. 65-67, 1-10; fig. 8).
Claim 5. Hsu-Berk discloses the bottle of claim 1, wherein the neck portion is integrated in one piece with the inner shoulder or outer shoulder (Hsu; fig. 2).
Claim 6. Hsu-Berk discloses the bottle of claim 1, wherein the neck portion is a separate piece, moulded from pulp, PET, PP or Polyethylene, attached to the shoulder portion (Hsu; [0032]).
Claim 7. Hsu-Berk discloses the bottle of claim 6, wherein the neck portion includes a tubular body 24 and a flange 23 at one end of the tubular body; and
the shoulder portion 21 includes an opening 221 for receiving the tubular body of the neck therethrough, while the flange abuts the shoulder portion around the opening (Hsu; fig. 2).
Claims 8-9. Hsu-Berk discloses the bottle of claim 7, wherein the tubular body of the neck portion includes a surface feature (thread) for receipt by a mating feature of a ring piece configured for surrounding the neck portion; such that the shoulder portion is sandwiched between the flange and the ring piece (Hsu; fig. 6).
Claims 10-12. Hsu-Berk discloses the bottle of claim 1, wherein the neck portion is comprised of at least one neck fitment 24 having a tubular portion and a flared portion for engagement with a mating portion 223 of the inner shoulder 22 (Hsu; [0032], fig. 1-2).
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu (US 2020/0407100) in view of Berk et al. (US 9,505,521) in view of Grahm et al. (US 2023/0054953).
Claims 2-3. Hsu-Berk discloses the bottle of claim 1, but fails to
disclose a bottle being formed by a pulp-based method. Graham discloses wherein
the tubular body portion, inner shoulder, outer shoulder and/or the base portion are
formed by a pulp-based method or formed in one piece by a spiral wound tube
manufacturing process ([0065], [0195]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to
one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the
invention to modify the manufacturing process of Hsu to include the process
of Graham to create an economically efficient product.
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu (US 2020/0407100) in view of Berk et al. (US 9,505,521) in view of Anderson et al. (US 5,738,921).
Claims 17-18. Hsu-Berk discloses the bottle of claim 1, but fails
to disclose a protective coating. Andersen teaches a bottle including an internal
protective coating or lamination or liners (bags) to render the bottle resistant to
liquid egress (col. 14, 11. 55-67). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one
having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the
invention to modify the bottle of Hsu to include the protective coating
of Andersen to assist in preventing the entering of liquids into and out of the bottle.
Claim(s) 13-14 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu (US 2020/0407100) in view of Berk et al. (US 9,505,521) in view of Kosmyna et al. (US 7,380,680).
Claim 13. Hsu-Berk discloses bottle of claim 1, but fails to disclose reinforcement elements. Kosmyna teaches wherein the inner and/or outer shoulder further comprise reinforcement elements 165/210, such as ribs (Kosmyna; fig. 13-14). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the shoulder portion of Hsu to include the reinforcements of Kosmyna to ensure a maintained connection of the bottle apparatus.
Claim 14. Hsu-Berk-Kosmyna discloses the bottle of claim 13, wherein the inner and outer shoulder comprise mutual reinforcement elements that mate together when the two-part construction is joined (Kosmyna; col. 7, 11. 7-15;
44-48).
Claim 19. Hsu-Berk discloses the bottle of claim 1, but fails to
disclose an outer covering. Kosmyna teaches a bottle including an outer sleeve 50
for covering at least a part of the tubular body portion 55 (fig. 2). Therefore, it
would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
effective filing date of the invention to modify the bottle assembly of Hsu to include the outer covering of Kosmyna to better protect the product and present to the consumer.
Claim 20. Hsu-Berk-Kosmyna discloses the bottle of claim 19,
wherein the outer sleeve additionally covers a joint between the tubular body
portion and the shoulder portion and/or the base portion (Kosmyna; fig. 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but in view of the amendment the search has been updated, new prior art has been identified and applied, and a new rejection has been made.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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