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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the drawing Figures 5-7 and 10,11 comprise a gray scale shading to show structure of the disclosed embodiment wherein, pertinent structure of the invention is difficult to visualize and specific structural elements are difficult to discern. It is suggested the applicant provide drawings with the grayscale shading removed and all critical structure clearly distinguishable. Appropriate action is required.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 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.
Claims 4-9 are 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitations “the first portion covers the indentation when the crease of the first folded sheet product is presented to the user” in lines 3-4. It is unclear as to how the first portion covers the indentation when the first portion of the sheet is disposed inside the dispenser and the indentation is shown to cover the first portion. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 9 recites the limitations “wherein a curvature of the ramp causes removal of force from the first folded sheet product and the second folded sheet product but retaining of force on the third folded sheet product” in lines 3-5. It is unclear as to how the curvature of the ramp causes removal of force from the first and the second folded sheet products but retaining of force on the third folded sheet product or whether there is another mechanism for the claimed effect. Appropriate clarification is required.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "such that" in lines 10,19 and 22 render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Similar issues in claim 2 line 3; claim 4 line 3; claim 5 line 4; claim 8 lines 2 and 3; claim 10 line 6; claim 16 line 6; claim 19 lines 8,21 and 24.
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.
Claims 1-5,11,12 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filipowicz (US 4,329,001) in view of Rippl (US 8,408,419).
Referring to claims 1,3,18 and 20. Filipowicz discloses a sheet product dispenser (10; Figure 1) and a method comprising:
a housing (12) defining an interior volume and including a bottom surface (40) and a front surface (78), the front surface (78) defining, at least in part, an opening (82);
a plurality of folded sheet products (108) positioned within the interior volume (interior of 12)
wherein each of the plurality of folded sheet products has a length from a first end to a second end and a width, wherein each of the plurality of folded sheet products includes a crease extending along the width at a position between the first end and the second end, wherein the plurality of folded sheet products includes at least a first folded sheet product and a second folded sheet product positioned subsequent to the first folded sheet product, wherein the plurality of folded sheet products are interleaved such that a first end of the second folded sheet product is positioned within the crease of the first folded sheet product;
a biasing element (104; Figure 2) disposed within the housing (12), the biasing element (104) configured to bias the plurality of folded sheet products (108) toward the opening (82); and
a ramp (84; Figure 3) disposed on the bottom surface (40) of the housing proximate the front surface (78) or a side surface of the housing (side surface 22 of 12) proximate the front surface (78), wherein the ramp (84) leads from the bottom surface (40) toward the opening (82) or from the side surface (side surface 22 of 12) toward a center of the opening (82),
wherein the bias of the biasing element (104) on the plurality of folded sheet products (108) causes the first folded sheet product (first sheet of 108) and the second folded sheet product (second sheet of 108) to move along the ramp (84).
causes the end of the first folded sheet product (folded portion of sheet product 108) to fall through the opening (82) such that the end of the first folded sheet product (108) and the first end of the second folded sheet product fall at least partially through the opening (82; see Figure 1) and are presented to a user to enable the user to grab the end of the first folded sheet (user may remove the sheet product from the dispenser) product along with the first end of the second folded sheet product (108)
Filipowicz does not specifically disclose wherein each of the plurality of folded sheet products has a length from a first end to a second end and a width, wherein each of the plurality of folded sheet products includes a crease extending along the width at a position between the first end and the second end, wherein the plurality of folded sheet products includes at least a first folded sheet product and a second folded sheet product positioned subsequent to the first folded sheet product, wherein the plurality of folded sheet products are interleaved such that a first end of the second folded sheet product is positioned within the crease of the first folded sheet product.
Rippl discloses a sheet dispenser (12; Figure 8) wherein each of the plurality of folded sheet products (16; Figure 8a) has a length (length of 16) from a first end (front end of 16) to a second end (rear end of 16) and a width (width of 16), wherein each of the plurality of folded sheet products (16) includes a crease (folding crease of 16) extending along the width at a position between the first end and the second end (see Figure 8A), wherein the plurality of folded sheet products includes at least a first folded sheet product (first sheet 16) and a second folded sheet product (second sheet 16) positioned subsequent to the first folded sheet product (interfolded as shown in Figure 8A), wherein the plurality of folded sheet products (16) are interleaved such that a first end of the second folded sheet product is positioned within the crease of the first folded sheet product (see Figure 8A).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Filipowicz to include the sheet product wherein each of the plurality of folded sheet products has a length from a first end to a second end and a width, wherein each of the plurality of folded sheet products includes a crease extending along the width at a position between the first end and the second end, wherein the plurality of folded sheet products includes at least a first folded sheet product and a second folded sheet product positioned subsequent to the first folded sheet product, wherein the plurality of folded sheet products are interleaved such that a first end of the second folded sheet product is positioned within the crease of the first folded sheet product as taught by Rippl because comprising a V-folded interleaved stack would allow the adjacent sheet of the sheet product to be removed and advanced forward to the opening as the top most sheet product is removed thus assuring the next to be dispensed sheet product is ready to be dispensed.
It would have been further obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Filipowicz in view of Rippl to include the V-folded interleaved stack disposed within the housing wherein the creased portion of the interfolded stack projects out of the opening of the dispenser wherein grasping the creased portion of the V-folded sheets results the user grasping the creased end and removing the first and the second sheet of the stack from the dispense because a user with be able to remove two sheets at with one dispensing event.
Referring to claim 2. Filipowicz in view of Rippl disclose a sheet product dispenser (10; Figure 1) comprising:
wherein the first folded sheet product (16; Figure 8a; Rippl) defines a first portion (front portion of sheet 16; Rippl) extending between the first end (top end of 16; Rippl) and the crease (fold crease of 16; Rippl), and wherein an exterior portion of the front surface (78; Filipowicz) defines an indentation (indentation portion around the opening 82 of surface 78 matching height of member 24; Filipowicz; Figure 1) such that at least portions of the crease of the first folded sheet product and the first portion of the first folded sheet product overlay the indentation (V-folded interleaved portion of the stack; Rippl).
Referring to claim 4. Filipowicz in view of Rippl disclose a sheet product dispenser (10; Figure 1) comprising:
wherein the first portion defines (front portion of sheet 16; Rippl) a first length (half length of sheet 16; Rippl), wherein the indentation (indentation portion around the opening 82 of surface 78 matching height of member 24; Filipowicz; Figure 1) has a second length in a vertical direction (width of 24; Filipowicz) that is less than the first length of the first portion of the first folded sheet product (front portion of sheet 16; Rippl) such that the first portion (front portion of sheet 16; Rippl) covers the indentation (indentation portion around the opening 82 of surface 78 matching height of member 24; Filipowicz; Figure 1) when the crease of the first folded sheet product is presented to the user.
Referring to claim 5. Filipowicz in view of Rippl disclose a sheet product dispenser (10; Figure 1) comprising:
wherein the first folded sheet product (sheet 16; Rippl) defines a first portion (front portion of sheet 16; Rippl) extending between the first end and the crease, wherein the first portion defines a first length (length of front portion of sheet 16; Rippl), wherein an exterior portion of the front surface (78) extends downwardly from the opening (82; Filipowicz) and defines a second length (length of 78 from bottom of 82 to the bottom of dispenser 10; Filipowicz) that is greater than the first length such that the first end of the first folded sheet product is above a bottom edge of the exterior portion (see portion of sheet 108 above front surface of 48; Figure Filipowicz) of the front surface when the crease of the first folded sheet product is presented to the user (as shown in Figure 1; Filipowicz).
Referring to claims 11,17 and 19. Filipowicz in view of Rippl disclose a sheet product dispenser (10; Figure 1) comprising the dispenser opening is sized to retain the stored sheet products with in the dispenser housing.
Filipowicz in view of Rippl do not disclose wherein an external portion of the front surface defines an external edge at a top of the front surface, and wherein the front surface defines a height such that the crease of the first folded sheet product rests along the external edge when the first folded sheet product and the second folded sheet product are ready to be dispensed together.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have included the size of the dispenser opening large enough wherein the opening size is unable to retain the top portion of the sheet product and resulting in the sheet product resting along the external edge when the first folded sheet product and the second folded sheet product are ready to be dispensed together, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 19, see claim rejections 1-18 above.
Referring to claim 12. Filipowicz in view of Rippl disclose a sheet product dispenser (10; Figure 1) wherein the first portion defines a first length (surface the sheet product surface) is longer than the height of the front surface. (see Figure 1; Filipowicz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have included wherein the first folded sheet product defines a first portion extending between the first end and the crease, wherein the first portion defines a first length, and wherein the height of the front surface and the first length of the first folded sheet product define a ratio that is 2:3 or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 6,7 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filipowicz (US 4,329,001) in view of Rippl (US 8,408,419) and further in view of Matsui (US 4,678,099).
Referring to claim 6. Filipowicz in view of Rippl do not disclose wherein the ramp is disposed on the bottom surface of the housing proximate the front surface, wherein the sheet product dispenser further includes a side ramp disposed within the housing, wherein the side ramp is adjacent to the ramp and an interior portion of the front surface, and wherein the side ramp has a retention edge.
Matsui discloses a sheet dispenser (Figure 1) wherein ramp (19; Figure 2A) is disposed on the bottom surface of the housing proximate the front surface (22), wherein the sheet product dispenser further includes a side ramp (20) disposed within the housing, wherein the side ramp (20) is adjacent to the ramp (19) and an interior portion of the front surface (interior of 15), and wherein the side ramp (20) has a retention edge (see tip of 20; Figure 2A).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Filipowicz in view of Rippl to include wherein the ramp is disposed on the bottom surface of the housing proximate the front surface, wherein the sheet product dispenser further includes a side ramp disposed within the housing, wherein the side ramp is adjacent to the ramp and an interior portion of the front surface, and wherein the side ramp has a retention edge as taught by Matsui because a plurality of ramps disposed adjacent the dispensing opening would allow for an improved channeling the sheet product towards the dispensing opening of the dispenser.
Referring to claims 7 and 13. Matsui discloses a sheet dispenser (Figure 1) wherein the side ramp (20) has a structural height (height of ramp 20) is proportioned to the dispenser opening (22).
Filipowicz in view of Rippl and Matsui do not disclose wherein a height of the side ramp is between 1.25 inches and 2.5 inches.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have included the height of the side ramp as being between 1.25 inches and 2.5 inches, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Referring to claim 14. Matsui discloses a sheet dispenser (Figure 1) wherein an angle of the ramp relative to the bottom surface is between 20 degrees and 60 degrees (see inclined angle of ramp 20 in Figure 2B; Matsui).
Referring to claim 15. Matsui discloses a sheet dispenser (Figure 1)
wherein the ramp (105; Figure 12) has a first portion (top portion 105) that has a first radius of curvature, the first portion being adjacent to the bottom surface (103), wherein the ramp (105) has a second portion (108) that has a second radius of curvature, the second portion being adjacent to an interior portion of the front surface, and wherein the first radius of curvature is less than the second radius of curvature (see curvatures of portion 105 and 108; Figure 12).
Claims 8-10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filipowicz (US 4,329,001) in view of Rippl (US 8,408,419) in view of Matsui (US 4,678,099) and further in view of West (US 2,253,742).
Referring to claims 8-10 and 16. Filipowicz in view of Rippl and Matsui do not disclose wherein the retention edge is a plurality of ribs oriented horizontally such that the plurality of folded sheet products can glide along a horizontal direction but such that the plurality of ribs exert a frictional force on the plurality of folded sheet products in a vertical direction.
West discloses a dispenser for interfolded paper (Figure 1) wherein the retention edge (10; Figure 4) is a plurality of ribs (14) oriented horizontally such that the plurality of folded sheet products (7) can glide along a horizontal direction (direction of the ribs 14) but such that the plurality of ribs (14) exert a frictional force on the plurality of folded sheet products in a vertical direction (see Figure 1).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Filipowicz in view of Rippl and Matsui to include a retention edge is a plurality of ribs oriented horizontally such that the plurality of folded sheet products can glide along a horizontal direction but such that the plurality of ribs exert a frictional force on the plurality of folded sheet products in a vertical direction as taught by West because the plurality of ribs would reduce the friction of the gliding surface on the sheet surface thus prevent the exterior surface of the sheet from being crumpled.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAKESH KUMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8314. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH from 8AM-6:30PM 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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/RAKESH KUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651