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 .
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Burton (U.S. 4,984,717). Burton teaches a vessel 10, shown in figure 1, adapted to contain liquids (Abstract), the vessel comprising a main body at 12, a base element 17, and a cap 20 that is removable secured to the main body with a threaded connection 18, 21 so as to form an airtight seal (see element 29), wherein the base 17 is secured to a lower end of the main body (figure 1) and is adapted to encase, support and stabilize the main body (figure 1), an upper end of the main body includes a male thread 18 that mates with a female thread 21 on the cap, and a base ring (shown radially outwardly of 29 in figure 2) that provides an anchor point for the cap and further provides a mechanism for the vessel to be used in conjunction with various carbonating devices, thereby enabling a user to prepare carbonated beverages in the vessel.
Regarding claim 2, the cap includes a stopper at 22 and 36 that seals an opening in the top of the main body (figure 2) when the stopper is in a closed position, the stopper moving to an open position when a user applies pressure to an actuating button 34 so that liquid flows out of the vessel, the stopper being spring loaded (spring at 35) so that the stopper returns to the closed position when the user releases pressure on the actuating button.
Regarding claim 3, the vessel 10 is sized so that an average human hand can hold the main body of the vessel while operating the actuating button, so that the user can pour liquid from the vessel using only one hand (figure 5).
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burton (U.S. 4,984,717) in view of Davis (U.S. 2020/0317424). Burton discloses the claimed invention except for the multiple differently colored caps. Davis teaches that it is known to provide a container assembly with multiple differently colored caps (see paragraph [0042]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the container of Burton with multiple differently colored cap, as taught by Davis, in order to indicate the contents of the vessels.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burton (U.S. 4,984,717) in view of Hatherell (U.S. 2014/0004241). Burton discloses the claimed invention except for the fill line. Hatherell teaches that it is known to provide a container assembly with a fill line (see element 162; paragraph [0105]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the container of Burton with a fill line, as taught by Hatherell, in order to indicate the maximum amount of contents that can be effectively stored in the vessel.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burton (U.S. 4,984,717) in view of Jahn (DE 102022104610B4). Burton discloses the claimed invention except for the at least one drain hole. Jahn teaches that it is known to provide a container assembly with at least one drain hole (see elements 11 and 13). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the container of Burton with at least one drain hole, as taught by Jahn, in order relieve pressure or provide a means to empty the vessel effectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art is cited for the cap and base element.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIKI MARINA ELOSHWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4538. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7: 00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m..
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. Avilés 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.
/NIKI M ELOSHWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3736