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 .
Response to Amendment
The proposed amendments filed 08/18/2026 have been entered. Claims 1, 3-11, 13-18, and 20 are currently pending. Claims 2, 12, and 19 have been cancelled from consideration.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 13-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0077962 (Elvin hereinafter) in view of US 4189850 (Dieterich hereinafter) and further in view of 8256640 (Luburic hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Elvin teaches a removable bin for a dryer (¶ 1) that discloses a substantially circular floor (Floor 54 in Figure 3); and a wall extending from the floor (Walls 50/20/18 seen in Figures 2, 4, and 5), the wall comprising: a lower wall portion attached to the floor (Lower wall 50 in Figures 4 and 5); a middle wall portion extending from the lower wall portion (Middle wall 20 in Figure 2, equivalently shown by 44/42/40 in Figures 4 and 5), the middle wall portion comprising: a plurality of columns (Columns with openings 38), each of the columns comprising a plurality of slot openings extending through the one or more walls (Openings 38 per ¶ 65); and an upper wall portion extending from the middle wall portion (Upper wall 18 in Figure 2), the upper wall portion comprising a plurality of handholds (Handholds 28 in Figure 2 per ¶ 52).
Elvin is silent with respect to the slot openings being elongated. Elvin in ¶ 65 discloses that the openings 38 can be any shape.
However, Dieterich teaches a centrifugal dryer that discloses the use of elongated slots to drain fluid (Figure 1 with slots 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the shape of the slots of Elvin with the teachings of Dieterich to allow for increased fluid outflow.
Elvin is the wall comprises inner and outer surfaces extending across at least the middle wall portion, the inner surface comprising a repeating pattern of surfaces, each of the patterns extending for at least a portion of a height of the inner surface and comprising: an elongated middle section, wherein the slot openings are located along the middle section; an elongated first end section extending from one end of the middle section; and an elongated second end section extending from another end of the middle section; wherein the first and second end sections are angled with respect to the middle section. Elvin’s bin inherently has inner and outer surfaces extending across the middle wall portion (Evident of Figure 2 of Elvin).
However, Luburic teaches a container and internal strengthening structure that discloses a wall that comprises inner and outer surfaces extending across at least the middle wall portion (Figures 1 and 2 show in the internal and external surfaces of the equivalent wall), the inner surface comprising a repeating pattern of surfaces (Pattern 30 in Figures 2, 10, 13, and 30), each of the patterns extending for at least a portion of a height of the inner surface (Pattern 30 in Figures 2, 10, 13, and 30) and comprising: an elongated middle section (Gaps between the patterns of 30), wherein the slot openings are located along the middle section (Resultant combination would the pattern of Luburic onto Elvin such that the slots would be within the pattern gaps); an elongated first end section extending from one end of the middle section (Any portion of the pattern extending “leftward” from the gap in the pattern); and an elongated second end section extending from another end of the middle section (Any portion of the pattern extending “rightward” from the gap in the pattern); wherein the first and second end sections are angled with respect to the middle section (Evident from the pattern 30 being raised).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the interior of the surface of Elvin with the webbing pattern of Luburic to increase the strength of the bin of Elvin.
Regarding claim 3, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 2 where the combination of Elvin and Dieterich would further disclose that the upper wall portion comprises an outwardly extending lip (Lip 24 of Figures 2-5 of Elvin),wherein the lip defines, at least in part, an upper opening for the bin (Figures 2-5 of Elvin).
Regarding claim 13, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 12 but are silent with respect to an angle between the middle section and the first end section is between approximately 170° and 179°.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to size the pattern of Luburic as applied to Elvin such that there is an angle between the middle section and the first end section is between approximately 170° and 179°, since it has been held that discovering the optimum range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233 . A review of the specification has not shown any criticality for this range.
Regarding claim 14, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 13 but are silent with respect that the angle between the middle section and the first end section is between approximately 176° and 177°.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to size the pattern of Luburic as applied to Elvin such that the angle between the middle section and the first end section is between approximately 176° and 177°, since it has been held that discovering the optimum range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233 . A review of the specification has not shown any criticality for this range.
Regarding claim 15, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 12 but are silent with respect to an angle between the middle section and the second end section is between approximately 170° and 179°.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to size the pattern of Luburic as applied to Elvin such that there is an angle between the middle section and the second end section is between approximately 170° and 179°, since it has been held that discovering the optimum range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233 . A review of the specification has not shown any criticality for this range.
Regarding claim 16, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 13 but are silent with respect that the angle between the middle section and the second end section is between approximately 176° and 177°.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to size the pattern of Luburic as applied to Elvin such that the angle between the middle section and the second end section is between approximately 176° and 177°, since it has been held that discovering the optimum range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233 . A review of the specification has not shown any criticality for this range.
Regarding claim 18, Elvin teaches a removable bin for a dryer (¶ 1) that discloses a substantially circular floor (Floor 54 in Figure 3); and a wall extending from the floor (Walls 50/20/18 seen in Figures 2, 4, and 5), the wall comprising: first and second ends (First end 18/20 of Figure 2 and second end 50 in Figures 4 and 5), wherein the floor is connected to the wall proximate to the second end (Second end 50 in Figures 4 and 5); a plurality of columns, each of the columns comprising a plurality of slot openings extending through the one or more walls (Openings 38 per ¶ 65), wherein the slot openings in adjacent ones of the columns are arranged in a staggered arrangement (Evident from Figures 2-5); and a plurality of handholds proximate to the first end (Handholds 28 in Figure 2 per ¶ 52).
Elvin is silent with respect to the slot openings being elongated. Elvin in ¶ 65 discloses that the openings 38 can be any shape.
However, Dieterich teaches a centrifugal dryer that discloses the use of elongated slots to drain fluid (Figure 1 with slots 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the shape of the slots of Elvin with the teachings of Dieterich to allow for increased fluid outflow.
Elvin is silent with respect that the wall comprises an inner surface, the inner surface comprising a repeating pattern of surfaces, each of the patterns extending for at least a portion of a height of the inner surface and comprising: an elongated middle section, wherein the slot openings are located along the middle section; an elongated first end section extending from one end of the middle section; and an elongated second end section extending from another end of the middle section; wherein the first and second end sections are angled with respect to the middle section. Elvin’s bin inherently has an inner surface (Evident of Figure 2 of Elvin).
However, Luburic teaches a container and internal strengthening structure that discloses a wall that comprises an inner (Figures 1 and 2 show in the internal surface of the equivalent wall), the inner surface comprising a repeating pattern of surfaces (Pattern 30 in Figures 2, 10, 13, and 30), each of the patterns extending for at least a portion of a height of the inner surface (Pattern 30 in Figures 2, 10, 13, and 30) and comprising: an elongated middle section (Gaps between the patterns of 30), wherein the slot openings are located along the middle section (Resultant combination would the pattern of Luburic onto Elvin such that the slots would be within the pattern gaps); an elongated first end section extending from one end of the middle section (Any portion of the pattern extending “leftward” from the gap in the pattern); and an elongated second end section extending from another end of the middle section (Any portion of the pattern extending “rightward” from the gap in the pattern); wherein the first and second end sections are angled with respect to the middle section (Evident from the pattern 30 being raised).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the interior of the surface of Elvin with the webbing pattern of Luburic to increase the strength of the bin of Elvin.
Claims 4-11, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0077962 (Elvin) in view of US 4189850 (Dieterich) in view of US 8256640 (Luburic) and further in view of US D477145 (Sofy hereinafter).
Regarding claim 4, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 3 but are silent with respect to the plurality of handholds comprises four handholds, and wherein the four handholds are arranged approximately 90° apart. Elvin in ¶ 52 discloses that any number of handles may be used.
However, Sofy teaches a basket that discloses the plurality of handholds comprising four handholds, and wherein the four handholds are arranged approximately 90° apart (Figure 1 shows the 4 handholds separated by 90°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the two handholds of Elvin with the 4 handholds of Sofy to allow a user to more readily grab the basket.
Regarding claim 5, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 4 where the combination of Elvin, Dieterich, and Sofy would further disclose that each of the handholds comprises: a grip portion (Grip being the surrounding area of 36 in Figure 2 of Elvin), the grip portion forming a portion of the lip (Evident from Figure 2 of Elvin); two lateral supports extending from the grip portion (Lateral supports being the top and bottom forming the opening 30 of Elvin); a lower handhold wall extending between at least a portion of the two lateral supports (Lower wall being the bottom wall forming the opening 30 where one reference line from 32 is extending towards in Figure 2 of Elvin), the lower handhold wall comprising a handhold edge extending between the two lateral supports (Evident from Figure 2 of Elvin); and a handhold opening defined, at least in part, by the handhold edge, the grip portion, and the two lateral supports (Opening 30 of Elvin Figure 2).
Regarding claim 6, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 5 where the combination of Elvin, Dieterich, and Sofy would further disclose a first lip member (Very top surface 36 of handhold 28 along the lip 24 of Elvin), and wherein the grip portion comprises a portion of the first lip member (Evident form Figure 2 of Elvin).
Regarding claim 7, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 6 where the combination of Elvin, Dieterich, and Sofy would further disclose that the grip portion further comprises a second lip member spaced apart from the first lip member (Second lip being the part of 36 facing towards 30).
Regarding claim 8, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 7 where the combination of Elvin, Dieterich, and Sofy would further disclose that the grip portion further comprises one or more lip ribs extending between the first lip member and the second lip member (Ribs seen at 36 of Figures 2 of Elvin).
Regarding claim 9, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 5 where the combination of Elvin, Dieterich, and Sofy would further disclose that each of the lateral supports comprises two lateral walls spaced apart from each other (In Figure 2 of Elvin the lateral supports are shown to each have an inner face and an outer face which are seen as two laterally spaced walls).
Regarding claim 10, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 9 where the combination of Elvin, Dieterich, and Sofy would further disclose that each of the lateral supports further comprises one or more connecting walls extending between the two lateral walls (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the exterior face of the lateral supports spanning between the disclosed two lateral walls reads on the connecting wall).
Regarding claim 11, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 6 where the combination of Elvin, Dieterich, and Sofy would further disclose that the handhold edge is curved (Evident from Figure 2 of Elvin).
Regarding claim 17, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 6 where the combination of Elvin, Dieterich, and Sofy would further disclose that the bin is configured to nest within a second one of the bin in a nested configuration (Figures 12-16 of Elvin), and wherein in the nested configuration, the lateral supports of the bin are adapted to rest on the lip of the second one of the bin (Evident from Figures 12-16 of Elvin).
Regarding claim 20, Elvin’s modified teachings are described above in claim 18 but are silent with respect to the plurality of handholds comprises four handholds, and wherein the four handholds are arranged approximately 90° apart. Elvin in ¶ 52 discloses that any number of handles may be used.
However, Sofy teaches a basket that discloses the plurality of handholds comprising four handholds, and wherein the four handholds are arranged approximately 90° apart (Figure 1 shows the 4 handholds separated by 90°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the two handholds of Elvin with the 4 handholds of Sofy to allow a user to more readily grab the basket.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the teachings of Luburic (US 8256640) fail to disclose a wall comprising inner and outer surfaces with a repeating pattern of angled surfaces. The Examiner disagrees due to Luburic in Figures 2, 10, 13, and 30 showing the web 30 being a repeating angled and raised pattern on an internal surface of a container. Applicant argues that the structure of their claims requires bending or molding to form the structure. First, Luburic appears to show the pattern being formed by molding (Column 13 Line 34 through Column 14 Line 13). Second, these claims are directed towards an apparatus and not a method of manufacturing therefore the process for forming the apparatus does not hold patentable weight. Applicant then argues that the sidewalls 12 of Luburic are flat to which the Examiner disagrees. The pattern 30 of Luburic is stated as being raised per Column 4 Line 62 through Column 5 Line 11 paired with Figure 2. Applicant furthers their argument with intended usage, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, the raised webbing is structurally the same as the claimed structure of claims 1 and 18 and therefore are not patentably distinct. For at least these reasons, Applicant’s arguments are not found to be persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CONNOR J. TREMARCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-2175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0700-1700 Eastern.
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, MICHAEL HOANG can be reached at (571) 272-6460. 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.
/CONNOR J TREMARCHE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights