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 § 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(s) 1, 3, 5-7, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2004/0066705 to Linz et al. (Linz) in view of US 2017/0354298 to Rizzuto and US Patent No. 8,443,993 to Desselle, US Patent No. 7,622,039 to Farrell et al. (Farrell) and US 2017/0362012 to Choltco-Devlin et al. (Choltco-Devlin).
Regarding claim 1, Linz discloses an insulating container comprising a canister (11) comprising a first inner wall (26) having a first end (35) with an opening extending into an internal reservoir for receiving liquid, a second outer wall (27) forming an outer shell of the canister, the second outer wall having a second end (29) configured to support the canister on a surface, a cavity (31) formed by an insulated double wall structure between the first inner wall and second outer wall, a spout adapter (10) comprising a spout channel (15) extending through a spout opening (at 16) on a top surface (12) of the spout adapter (10) such that the spout channel fluidly connected the internal reservoir and the spout opening (Fig 6), wherein the spout opening (at 16) is smaller than the opening (at 35) of the canister (Fig 4), a bottom surface (23) that removably couples to and seals the opening of the canister (at 25), a grip ring (20) extending around a circumference of the spout adapter and spaced between a bottom surface of the spout adapter and the top surface (12) of the spout adapter, a cap (14) that removably couples to and seals the spout opening (at 16) on the top surface (12) of the spout adapter. Linz does not teach the bottom surface being a threaded surface and a threaded spout surface configured to removably couple to the cap. However, Rizzuto discloses an adapter (14, Fig 5) and in particular discloses a bottom surface with seals (34) that can be replaced with threads (€0027) to connect adapter (14) to container (12) and furthermore discloses a threaded spout surface (46) configured to removably couple to a cap (16) (€0030). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a screw thread connection to the Linz bottom surface and spout surface in order to connect to the cap and container as suggested by Rizzuto since it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results would have been obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). Linz does not teach a handle rigidly extending from the grip ring and the cap configured to magnetically couple to a docking surface on the grip ring. However, Desselle discloses a container (14) with a grip ring (12) having a handle (28) rigidly extending from the grip ring with a cap (16) configured to couple to surface of the handle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a handle rigidly extending from the grip ring of Linz in order to have a surface to couple a cap such that the cap can be attached to the container when removed. The modified Linz does not teach the handle having a magnetic docking surface. However, Desselle further discloses in an alternate embodiment (Fig 9), where instead of the grip ring and cap coupling by groove and indentation, the grip ring and cap are magnetically coupled by magnetic surface (88) on the grip ring (82) and magnetic surface (90) on the cap (86). Taken as a whole, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the surface of the handle (28) be magnetic and form a magnetic docking surface for the cap as suggested by Deselle in order to couple the cap and container through magnetism rather than indentation and groove since it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results would have been obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). The modified Linz does not teach the magnetic docking surface comprising an overmolding covering a magnetic element. However, Farrell discloses a spout (Fig 1) and in particular discloses a magnetic docking surface comprising an overmolding over a magnetic element (22, 24) (Claim 7). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide an overmolding over the magnetic element of the modified Linz as suggested by Farrell in order to facilitate making the magnet integral with the spout adapter. Linz does not teach the cavity to be a sealed vacuum. However, Choltco-Devlin discloses an insulating container (20) and in particular discloses the container comprising a body formed by inner (34) and outer walls (35) that form a sealed vacuum cavity (37) in between. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a sealed vacuum to the Linz cavity as suggested by Choltco-Devlin in order to provide insulation (Choltco-Devlin, €0009)
Regarding claim 3, the modified Linz teaches the container of claim 1 but does not teach surface of the cap including a polymeric outer layer covering a ferromagnetic material. However, Farrell discloses that it was known in the art to incorporate a polymeric outer layer (plastic) covering a ferromagnetic material (22, 24) and in particular discloses that it was known to embed ferromagnetic material in a plastic structure. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a ferromagnetic material of the modified Linz to the cap by embedding the material in plastic such that the plastic formed a polymeric outer layer covering the material as suggested by Farrell in order to protect the material.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Linz teaches the container of claim 1 and further teaches grip ring (20) configured to be grasped by a user in order to couple and uncouple the spout adapter (10) from the canister since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 6, Linz further teaches grip ring (20) integrally molded with spout adapter (10) (Fig 1).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Linz further teaches the magnetic element is a magnetic plate (22, 24, Farrell).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linz in view of Rizzuto, Desselle, Farrell, Choltco-Devlin and US Patent No. 5,251,788 to Moore.
Regarding claim 4, the modified Linz teaches the container of claim 1, but does not teach spout opening of the spout adapter off-center of the spout adapter. However, Moore discloses a container (Fig 1) and in particular discloses that it was known in the art to provide an adapter (24) wherein spout opening (46) is smaller than opening (14) of the container (12) and spout opening (46) off center on top surface of the adapter (Figs 3-4). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious move the modified Linz spout opening off-center as suggested by Moore to facilitate dispensing.
Claim(s) 8-10, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2004/0066705 to Linz et al. (Linz) in view of US 2017/0354298 to Rizzuto and US Patent No. 8,443,993 to Desselle and US Patent No. 7,622,039 to Farrell et al. (Farrell).
Regarding claim 8, Linz discloses a spout adapter (10) configured to removably couple to and seal an opening of a container (11), the spout adapter comprising a lower cap structure comprising a lower surface (23) configured to removably couple to and seal the opening of the container (at 25), a spout channel (15) extending through a spout opening (at 16) on a top surface (12) of the spout adapter (10) such that the spout channel (15) is configured to fluidly connect an internal reservoir of the container and the spout opening, a grip ring (20) extending around a circumference of the spout adapter (10) and spaced between a bottom surface of the spout adapter and the top surface (12) of the spout adapter, an upper cap (14) that removably couples to and seals the spout opening on the top surface (12) of the spout adapter. Linz does not teach the lower surface comprising a threaded surface. However, Rizzuto discloses an adapter (14, Fig 5) and in particular discloses a bottom surface with seals (34) that can be replaced with threads (€0027) to connect adapter (14) to container (12) and furthermore discloses a threaded spout surface (46) configured to removably couple to a cap (16) (€0030). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a screw thread connection to the Linz bottom surface and spout surface in order to connect to the cap and container as suggested by Rizzuto since it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results would have been obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). Linz does not teach a handle rigidly extending from the grip ring and the cap configured to magnetically couple to a docking surface on the grip ring. However, Desselle discloses a container (14) with a grip ring (12) having a handle (28) rigidly extending from the grip ring with a cap (16) configured to couple to surface of the handle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a handle rigidly extending from the grip ring of Linz in order to have a surface to couple a cap such that the cap can be attached to the container when removed. The modified Linz does not teach the handle having a magnetic docking surface. However, Desselle further discloses in an alternate embodiment (Fig 9), where instead of the grip ring and cap coupling by groove and indentation, the grip ring and cap are magnetically coupled by magnetic surface (88) on the grip ring (82) and magnetic surface (90) on the cap (86). Taken as a whole, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the surface of the handle (28) be magnetic and form a magnetic docking surface for the cap as suggested by Deselle in order to couple the cap and container through magnetism rather than indentation and groove since it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results would have been obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). The modified Linz does not teach the magnetic docking surface comprising an overmolding covering a magnetic element. However, Farrell discloses a spout (Fig 1) and in particular discloses a magnetic docking surface comprising an overmolding over a magnetic element (22, 24) (Claim 7). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide an overmolding over the magnetic element of the modified Linz as suggested by Farrell in order to facilitate making the magnet integral with the spout adapter.
Regarding claim 9, the modified Linz teaches the adapater of claim 8 and further teaches overmolding covers a support structure (38, Farrell, col. 2, ll. 45-50) holding the magnetic element.
Regarding claim 10, the modified Linz teaches the container of claim 8 but does not teach surface of the cap including a polymeric outer layer covering a ferromagnetic material. However, Farrell discloses that it was known in the art to incorporate a polymeric outer layer (plastic) covering a ferromagnetic material (22, 24) and in particular discloses that it was known to embed ferromagnetic material in a plastic structure. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a ferromagnetic material of the modified Linz to the cap by embedding the material in plastic such that the plastic formed a polymeric outer layer covering the material as suggested by Farrell in order to protect the material.
Regarding claim 12, the modified Linz teaches the container of claim 8 and further teaches grip ring (20) configured to be grasped by a user in order to couple and uncouple the spout adapter (10) from the canister since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 13, Linz further teaches grip ring (20) integrally molded with spout adapter (10) (Fig 1).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Linz further teaches the magnetic element is a magnetic plate (22, 24, Farrell).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linz in view of Rizzuto, Desselle, Farrell and US Patent No. 5,251,788 to Moore.
Regarding claim 11, the modified Linz teaches the container of claim 8 but does not teach spout opening of the spout adapter off-center of the spout adapter. However, Moore discloses a container (Fig 1) and in particular discloses that it was known in the art to provide an adapter (24) wherein spout opening (46) is smaller than opening (14) of the container (12) and spout opening (46) off center on top surface of the adapter (Figs 3-4). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious move the modified Linz spout opening off-center as suggested by Moore to facilitate dispensing.
Claim(s) 15-18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linz in view of Rizzuto, Desselle, Moore, Farrell and Choltco-Devlin.
Regarding claim 15, Linz discloses an insulating container comprising a canister (11) comprising a first inner wall (26) having a first end (35) with an opening extending into an internal reservoir for receiving liquid, a second outer wall (27) forming an outer shell of the canister, the second outer wall having a second end (29) configured to support the canister on a surface, a cavity (31) formed by an insulated double wall structure between the first inner wall and second outer wall, a spout adapter (10) comprising a spout channel (15) extending through a spout opening (at 16) on a top surface (12) of the spout adapter (10) such that the spout channel fluidly connected the internal reservoir and the spout opening (Fig 6), wherein the spout opening (at 16) is smaller than the opening (at 35) of the canister (Fig 4), a bottom surface (23) that removably couples to and seals the opening of the canister (at 25), a grip ring (20) extending around a circumference of the spout adapter (10) and spaced between a bottom surface of the spout adapter and the top surface (12) of the spout adapter, a cap (14) that removably couples to and seals the spout opening (at 16) on the top surface (12) of the spout adapter. Linz does not teach the bottom surface being a threaded surface and a threaded spout surface configured to removably couple to the cap. However, Rizzuto discloses an adapter (14, Fig 5) and in particular discloses a bottom surface with seals (34) that can be replaced with threads (€0027) to connect adapter (14) to container (12) and furthermore discloses a threaded spout surface (46) configured to removably couple to a cap (16) (€0030). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a screw thread connection to the Linz bottom surface and spout surface in order to connect to the cap and container as suggested by Rizzuto since it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results would have been obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). Linz does not teach a handle rigidly extending from the grip ring and the cap configured to magnetically couple to a docking surface on the grip ring. However, Desselle discloses a container (14) with a grip ring (12) having a handle (28) rigidly extending from the grip ring with a cap (16) configured to couple to surface of the handle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a handle rigidly extending from the grip ring of Linz in order to have a surface to couple a cap such that the cap can be attached to the container when removed. The modified Linz does not teach the handle having a magnetic docking surface. However, Desselle further discloses in an alternate embodiment (Fig 9), where instead of the grip ring and cap coupling by groove and indentation, the grip ring and cap are magnetically coupled by magnetic surface (88) on the grip ring (82) and magnetic surface (90) on the cap (86). Taken as a whole, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the surface of the handle (28) be magnetic and form a magnetic docking surface for the cap as suggested by Deselle in order to couple the cap and container through magnetism rather than indentation and groove since it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results would have been obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). Linz does not teach spout opening of the spout adapter off-center of the spout adapter. However, Moore discloses a container (Fig 1) and in particular discloses that it was known in the art to provide an adapter (24) wherein spout opening (46) is smaller than opening (14) of the container (12) and spout opening (46) off center on top surface of the adapter (Figs 3-4). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious move the modified Linz spout opening off-center as suggested by Moore to facilitate dispensing. Linz does not teach surface of the cap including a polymeric outer layer covering a ferromagnetic material. However, Farrell discloses that it was known in the art to incorporate a polymeric outer layer (plastic) covering a ferromagnetic material (22, 24) and in particular discloses that it was known to embed ferromagnetic material in a plastic structure. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a ferromagnetic material of the modified Linz to the cap by embedding the material in plastic such that the plastic formed a polymeric outer layer covering the material as suggested by Farrell in order to protect the material. The modified Linz does not teach the magnetic docking surface comprising an overmolding covering a magnetic element. However, Farrell discloses a spout (Fig 1) and in particular discloses a magnetic docking surface comprising an overmolding over a magnetic element (22, 24) (Claim 7). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide an overmolding over the magnetic element of the modified Linz as suggested by Farrell in order to facilitate making the magnet integral with the spout adapter. Linz does not teach the cavity to be a sealed vacuum. However, Choltco-Devlin discloses an insulating container (20) and in particular discloses the container comprising a body formed by inner (34) and outer walls (35) that form a sealed vacuum cavity (37) in between. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a sealed vacuum to the Linz cavity as suggested by Choltco-Devlin in order to provide insulation (Choltco-Devlin, €0009).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Linz teaches the container of claim 15 and further teaches magnetic docking surface (88) formed from portion of a handle (60, Desselle) extending from grip ring (16).
Regarding claim 17, Linz further teaches grip ring (20) integrally molded with spout adapter (10) (Fig 1).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Linz teaches the container of claim 15 and further teaches magnetic material (22, 24, Farrell) secured by support structure support structure (38, Farrell, col. 2, ll. 45-50) holding the magnetic element.
Regarding claim 20, the modified Linz further teaches cap (14) threadedly engages spout adapter (10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 19 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pg 3 of remarks, filed 7/2/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-7, 15-20 under 35 USC 103(a) 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 US 2017/0362012 to Choltco-Devlin et al. (Choltco-Devlin). In particular, Choltco-Devlin discloses a beverage container comprising inner and outer walls and the cavity between the walls is a vacuum-sealed chamber used for insulation. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to vacuum seal the cavity of Linz as suggested by Choltco-Devlin in order to provide better insulation for the Linz container.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT POON whose telephone number is (571)270-7425. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:30 am to 6:00 pm.
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.
/ROBERT POON/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
