DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-10, 14-15, 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Marina (US 10610045).
Claim 1, Marina discloses an annular ring (610) configured to at least partially be disposed in an opening of the liquid-filled container (700);
a protrusion (602) disposed in a central opening of the annular ring;
one or more spokes (604) extending radially outward from the protrusion to the annular ring, wherein
the protrusion is directly coupled to the one or more spokes (FIG 7; 600 absent 632 is constructed as a single piece) and extends to a location vertically above the annular ring (602 extends above 610) and is configured for piercing a seal (716) of the liquid-filled container (FIG 8-10).
Claim 2, Marina discloses wherein the one or more spokes (604) extend vertically to or above a horizontal plane extending along a lower surface of the annular ring (FIG 8).
Claim 4, Marina discloses wherein the adapter includes through openings adjacent the annular rinq and the one or more spokes (FIG 6-8).
Claim 5, Mariana discloses wherein the adapter is made of a polymer (Col 4, lines 40 to 64).
Claim 7, Mariana discloses wherein the protrusion (602) is disposed at a center of the annular ring (FIG 6-10).
Claim 8, Mariana discloses wherein the protrusion (602) includes a sharp edge or rounded edge (FIG 6-10).
Claim 9, Mariana discloses wherein the one or more spokes (604) include a plurality of spokes (FIG 6-7) that connect in the central opening.
Claim 10, Mariana discloses an annular ring (610) configured to at least partially be disposed in an opening of the liquid-filled container (700);
one or more spokes (604) extending linearly and continuously across a central opening of the annular ring from a first location of the annular ring diametrically opposed to a second location of the annular ring (FIG 6-10); and
a protrusion (602) extending from the one or more spokes to a location vertically above the annular ring and configured for piercing a seal of the liquid-filled container, wherein a lower surface of the one or more spokes is substantially flush with a lower surface of the annular ring (FIG 8-10).
Claim 13, Mariana discloses wherein an upper surface of the one or more spokes (604) at the first location and the second location is disposed below an upper surface of the annular ring (602; FIG 6-10).
Claim 14, Mariana discloses wherein the one or more spokes (604) and the annular ring define at least two openings through the adapter (FIG 6-7).
Claim 15, Mariana discloses a vessel body (200) configured for storing a liquid and having an opening for receiving the liquid; and
an adapter at least partially disposed in the opening, the adapter comprising:
an annular ring (610);
one or more spokes (604) extending at least partially across a central opening of the annular ring; and
a protrusion (602) extending vertically above the one or more spokes to a location vertically above the annular ring and configured for piercing a seal (716) of a liquid-filled container (700).
Claim 17, Mariana wherein the storage vessel is a windshield fluid reservoir (Mariana discloses the same structure as is claimed and therefore is inherently capable of carrying out the same function of storing windshield wiper fluid).
Claim 18, Mariana discloses a cap (400) configured to close the opening, and wherein the adapter is entirely disposed in the vessel body (FIG 8).
Claim 19, Mariana discloses wherein the vessel body (200) include a mouth adjacent to the opening and the mouth includes a ledge (624), wherein the adapter is configured to rest on the ledge (FIG 8).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 6, 11-12, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mariana as applied to claims 1, 10 and 15 above.
Claims 3, 11 and 16, Mariana discloses the claimed invention except for varying width of the spokes. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to vary the width of the spoke along its length in order to provide improved structural support, since it has been held that the configuration was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration claimed was significant. MPEP 2144.04
Claim 6, Mariana discloses the claimed invention except for outer diameter of annular ring is 1-3 inches. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to change the size of the outer diameter of the annular ring to 1-3 inches in order to accommodate the users’ preferred containers, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04
Claims 12 and 20, Marian discloses wherein the lower surface of the one or more spokes (604) is substantially flat (FIG 8-10).
Mariana discloses the claimed invention except for one or more spoke increase in height from the first location to the protrusion. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to change the height of the spokes in order to provide improved structural support, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) above 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
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 JEREMY W CARROLL whose telephone number is (571)272-4988. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 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, Paul Durand can be reached at (571) 272-4459. 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.
JEREMY W. CARROLL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3754
/Jeremy Carroll/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754