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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/18/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-8, 21, and 22 are pending.
Claims 1-8, 21, and 22 are amended.
Claims 9-20 are canceled.
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 2 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 2 recites “an attachment band , wherein the attachment band is positioned to sit atop the ridge and against the top, and wherein the attachment band is permanently fastened to the top and the entire perimeter of the mating surface.” According to the specification, the top is 112 which appears to be the entire cover (since 112 is shown to be all over the cover in fig. 4-6). It is unclear as to how the attachment band be part of the top and also be against as claimed in claim 2. Furthermore, it is unclear as to how the attachment band can be permanently fastened to the top if the top is the entire cover. Further correction and or clarification is required. For examination purpose, the claim will be examined as the following “an attachment band , wherein the attachment band is positioned to sit atop the ridge and against the mating surface, and wherein the attachment band is permanently fastened to the entire perimeter of the mating surface”
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Perek (US 20180215513).
Regarding claim 1, Perek discloses, A portable container (Fig. 1) , comprising: a body (5), the body having a bottom (14) opposite an opening (26), the body having sidewalls (2), and sidewall of 8) attached to the bottom (Fig. 2) ;a top (3);a ridge (See annotated fig. below) disposed around a perimeter of an outer surface of the sidewalls, the ridge configured to provide a seat for the top ;a mating surface (See annotated fig. below) defined by a portion of the outer surface of the sidewalls between the ridge and the opening; and wherein a portion of the top is positioned to sit atop the seat of the ridge (See annotated numeral P1) and against the mating surface, and wherein the top is permanently fastened to the body along the entire perimeter of the mating surface (Lid 10 is attached to container body 8 via barbs 40 that are all around as shown in fig. 1 and placed inside slit 46 permanently attaching the lid to the body).
PNG
media_image1.png
539
895
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Perek discloses, an attachment band (10), wherein the attachment band is positioned to sit atop the ridge and against the mating surface , and wherein the attachment band is permanently fastened to the entire perimeter of the mating surface (See annotated fig. of claim 1) .
Regarding claim 3, Perek discloses the body is manufactured from rigid or molded plastic (para 26).
Regarding claim 6, Perek discloses ridge. The limitation “ridge is formed as part of a molding process for said body.” is considered product-by-process. The determination of patentability in a product-by-process claim is based on the product itself, even though the claim may be limited and defined by the process. That is, the product in such a claim is unpatentable if it is the same as or obvious from the product of the prior art, even if the prior product was made by a different process. See MPEP 2113(I). A product-by-process limitation adds no patentable distinction to the claim, and is unpatentable if the claimed product is the same as a product of the prior art. (Same cite as above).
Regarding claim 7, Perek discloses, the ridge is formed as a portion of the sidewalls (See annotated fig for claim 1; structure 8 is permanently attached to 16 ).
Regarding claim 8, Perek discloses, the ridge is formed around said entire periphery of the sidewalls(See annotated fig for claim 1).
Regarding claim 21, Perek discloses, the top further comprises a flap (12) , the flap being configured to cover the opening.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4,5, and 22 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 with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANJIDUL ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7670. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 -5:00.
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. Aviles 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.
/SANJIDUL ISLAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
/ORLANDO E AVILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3736