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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/19/2026 has been entered.
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 7 and 10-11 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 7 recites the limitation "Error! Reference source not found" in lines 1-2 is unclear what applicant meant by that, it will be assumed that it’s an error when applicant submitted the claims and it’s a type. For purpose of examination, that limitation will be taken out of the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "Error! Reference source not found" in lines 1-2 is unclear what applicant meant by that, it will be assumed that it’s an error when applicant submitted the claims and it’s a type. For purpose of examination, that limitation will be taken out of the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "Error! Reference source not found" in lines 1-2 is unclear what applicant meant by that, it will be assumed that it’s an error when applicant submitted the claims and it’s a type. For purpose of examination, that limitation will be taken out of the claim.
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) 1-5,10-15,18, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kent (US20240226828A1), Pinelli (US20210085104A1) and further in view of Taper (US 20190075914 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kent teaches a beverage container assembly, comprising (fig.1 shows the assembly):
a container housing having a sidewall, a bottom wall, and an opening defining a liquid retaining cavity (annotated fig.2 of Kent below shows the container housing having a sidewall, bottom wall and opening at the top when the cap is taken off that has access to the cavity that can hold liquid);
a lid assembly removably connected to the container housing adjacent the opening of the container housing (annotated fig.2 below shows the lid assembly that is removal connected to the container via threads and would be adjacent to the opening of the container);
a carrying handle (see annotated fig.2 below for the carrying handle);
a securing member, separate from the handle and removably connected to the handle (see annotated fig.2 below for the securing member separate from the handle and removal connected to the handle). Kent does not teach a handle is pivotable and a hanging toy connected to the securing member.
Pinellie does teach wherein a handle is a pivotable (Fig.3 shows the handle 30 that is pivotable). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the carrying handle disclosed by Kent by adding the teaching of pivotable carrying handle as disclosed by Pinellie in order to hold the handle at different angles making it for convenient when carrying the container.
Kent as modified directly above does not teach wherein a hanging toy is connected to the securing member.
Teper does teach wherein a hanging toy is connected to the securing member (fig.4 and 21 show the retention area 118 with the hanging toy 142 that are removably connected to the wall 140; it is noted that the toy is read as any object that can be played with). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the securing member disclosed by Kent as modified above by adding the teaching of removable toy attached to the securing member as disclosed by Teper in order to allow the user to better organize personal items and for quicker retrieval as the toy is removable and connected to the container on the outside. “In one embodiment, a fluid bottle (or jug or fluid container) is disclosed, having a phone retention portion, a key retentions portion, a card retention portion, and a cap and handle assembly. The bottle allows a user to better organize personal items, such as a phone, keys, credit cards or money, and/or headphones.” (0005, Teper)
Annotated fig.2 of Kent
PNG
media_image1.png
698
629
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 1 above wherein the lid housing has an opening to dispense liquid contained in the cavity (fig.6 shows the lid housing having a opening 138 that dispense the liquid contained in the container cavity).
Regarding claim 3, the references as applied to claim 2 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 2 further teaches wherein the opening is adjacent a spout of the lid housing (fig.6 the opening 138 being adjacent to the spout 140 of the lid housing).
Regarding claim 4, the references as applied to claim 2 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 2 does not teach a straw within the opening to dispense liquid contained in the cavity.
Pinelli does teach a straw within the opening to dispense liquid contained in the cavity. (fig.2 shows the straw 20 within the opening to dispense liquid container in the cavity). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container to include straw attached to the opening disclosed by claim 2 by adding the teaching of a straw to dispense liquid as disclosed by Pinelli in order to have a controlled flow of the liquid being dispensed though the opening.
Regarding claim 5, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 1 further teaches a seal between the lid housing and the container (“Between the bottle body 102 and the bottle lid 108 is an attaching ring 104 and a sealing ring 106. The sealing ring 106 is configured to form a seal between the bottle body 102 and the bottle lid 108, and may be made of silicone, rubber, or any other sealing material”-0059,Kent).
Regarding claim 10, as best understood based on 112 issue identified above, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 1 above wherein the securing member is integral with the hanging toy (fig.2 above shows the securing member that would be integral with the hanging toy as modified).
Regarding claim 11, as best understood based on 112 issue identified above, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 1 above wherein the securing member is removably associated with the beverage container assembly (annotated fig.2 above the securing member is removably associated with the container assembly).
Regarding claim 12, Kent teaches a beverage container assembly, comprising (fig.1 shows the assembly):
a container housing having a sidewall, a bottom wall, and an opening defining a liquid retaining cavity (annotated fig.2 of Kent above shows the container having a sidewall, bottom wall and opening at the top when the cap is taken off that has access to the cavity that can hold liquid);
a lid assembly connected to the container housing adjacent the opening of the container housing, the lid assembly having an opening providing access to the cavity of the container housing (annotated fig.2 above shows the lid assembly that is removal connected to the container via threads and would be adjacent to the opening of the container and see fig.10C for the opening that provides access to the cavity of the container);
a carrying handle (see annotated fig.2 of Kent above);
a receiver, separate from the handle, extending from the beverage container assembly (see annotated fig.2 above for the receiver separate from the container assembly). Kent does not teach wherein a carrying handle is pivotable and a hanging toy removably connected to the receiver outside the cavity of the container housing.
Pinellie does teach wherein a handle is a pivotable (Fig.3 shows the handle 30 that is pivotable). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the carrying handle disclosed by Kent by adding the teaching of pivotable carrying handle as disclosed by Pinellie in order to hold the handle at different angles making it for convenient when carrying the container.
Kent as modified directly above does not teach wherein a hanging toy is connected to the securing member.
Teper does teach wherein a hanging toy is connected to the securing member (fig.4 and 21 show the retention area 118 with the hanging toy 142 that are removably connected to the wall 140; it is noted that the toy is read as any object that can be played with). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the securing member disclosed by Kent as modified above by adding the teaching of removable toy attached to the securing member as disclosed by Teper in order to allow the user to better organize personal items and for quicker retrieval as the toy is removable and connected to the container on the outside. “In one embodiment, a fluid bottle (or jug or fluid container) is disclosed, having a phone retention portion, a key retentions portion, a card retention portion, and a cap and handle assembly. The bottle allows a user to better organize personal items, such as a phone, keys, credit cards or money, and/or headphones.” (0005, Teper)
Regarding claim 13, the references as applied to claim 12 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 12 further teaches wherein the lid assembly is removably connected to the container housing (fig.2 above shows the lid assembly that is removably connected to the container).
Regarding claim 14, the references as applied to claim 12 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 12 does not teach a straw within the opening to dispense liquid contained in the cavity.
Pinelli does teach a straw within the opening to dispense liquid contained in the cavity. (fig.2 shows the straw 20 within the opening to dispense liquid container in the cavity). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container to include straw attached to the opening disclosed by claim 12 by adding the teaching of a straw to dispense liquid as disclosed by Pinelli in order to have a controlled flow of the liquid being dispensed though the opening.
Regarding claim 15, the references as applied to claim 12 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 12 further teaches wherein the receiver is removably connected to the handle (see annotated fig.2 above for the receiver is removably connected to the handle).
Regarding claim 18, Kent teaches a beverage container assembly, comprising (fig.2 shows the assembly):
a container housing having a sidewall, a bottom wall, and an opening defining a liquid retaining cavity (annotated fig.2 of Kent above shows the container 8 having a sidewall, bottom wall and opening at the top when the cap is taken off that has access to the cavity that can hold liquid);
a removable lid assembly connected to the container housing adjacent the opening of the container housing, the lid assembly having an opening providing access to the cavity of the container housing (annotated fig.2 above shows the lid assembly that is removal connected to the container via threads and would be adjacent to the opening of the container and fig.10C above for the opening that provides access to the cavity of the container);
a carrying handle (see annotated fig.2 above for the carrying handle);
a securing member removably connected to the handle (see annotated fig.2 above for the securing member removably connected to the handle). Kent does not teach wherein the carrying handle is pivotable and wherein a hanging toy connected to the securing member.
Pinellie does teach wherein a handle is a pivotable (Fig.3 shows the handle 30 that is pivotable). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the carrying handle disclosed by Kent by adding the teaching of pivotable carrying handle as disclosed by Pinellie in order to hold the handle at different angles making it for convenient when carrying the container.
Kent as modified directly above does not teach wherein a hanging toy is connected to the securing member.
Teper does teach wherein a hanging toy is connected to the securing member (fig.4 and 21 show the retention area 118 with the hanging toy 142 that are removably connected to the wall 140; it is noted that the toy is read as any object that can be played with). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the securing member disclosed by Kent as modified above by adding the teaching of removable toy attached to the securing member as disclosed by Teper in order to allow the user to better organize personal items and for quicker retrieval as the toy is removable and connected to the container on the outside. “In one embodiment, a fluid bottle (or jug or fluid container) is disclosed, having a phone retention portion, a key retentions portion, a card retention portion, and a cap and handle assembly. The bottle allows a user to better organize personal items, such as a phone, keys, credit cards or money, and/or headphones.” (0005, Teper)
Regarding claim 21, the references as applied to claim 18 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 18 further teaches wherein the hanging toy is removable from the securing member (Kent as modified in claim 18 will have the hanging toy discloses in Taper be removable from the securing member as the securing member of Kent is carabiner).
Claim(s) 7-8,16 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kent (US20240226828A1), Pinelli (US20210086961A1) , Taper (US 20190075914 A1) and further in view of Driscoll (US20230329424A1).
Regarding claim 7, as best understood based on 112 issue identified above, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 1 does not teach wherein the hanging toy is a fidget toy.
Driscoll does teach wherein the hanging toy is fidget toy (fig.1 shows the fidget toy 102 with the pop buttons 210). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hanging toy disclosed by claim 1 by adding the teaching of a fidget toy as disclosed by Driscoll in order to relief stress. “Further, some aspects of certain fidget toy components 102 can improve hand and finger function. This can be useful for users with ADHD, anxiety, or other issues. Accordingly, the fidget toy components 102 can relieve stress and promote attention to task as well as other benefits.” (0048, Driscoll)
Regarding claim 8, the references as applied to claim 7 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 7 further teaches wherein the fidget toy is a pop-it fidget toy (fig.1 the fidget toy 102 has pop it elements 210).
Regarding claim 16, the references as applied to claim 12 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 12 does not teach wherein the hanging toy is a fidget toy.
Driscoll does teach wherein the hanging toy is a fidget toy (fig.1 shows the fidget toy 102 with the pop buttons 210). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hanging toy disclosed by claim 12 by adding the teaching of a fidget toy as disclosed by Driscoll in order to relief stress. “Further, some aspects of certain fidget toy components 102 can improve hand and finger function. This can be useful for users with ADHD, anxiety, or other issues. Accordingly, the fidget toy components 102 can relieve stress and promote attention to task as well as other benefits.” (0048, Driscoll)
Regarding claim 22, the references as applied to claim 18 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Kent as modified in claim 18 does not teach wherein the hanging toy is a fidget toy.
Driscoll does teach wherein the hanging toy is a fidget toy (fig.1 shows the fidget toy 102 with the pop buttons 210). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hanging toy disclosed by claim 18 by adding the teaching of a fidget toy as disclosed by Driscoll in order to relief stress. “Further, some aspects of certain fidget toy components 102 can improve hand and finger function. This can be useful for users with ADHD, anxiety, or other issues. Accordingly, the fidget toy components 102 can relieve stress and promote attention to task as well as other benefits.” (0048, Driscoll)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant had some issues with the claims as addressed in 112 above, looks like a typo. Applicant new limitation are addressed above with new references not previously used, making the arguments to prior references moot. Applicant does argue against Teper which is still used and maintained as the Teper is used for hanging toy i.e. the keys being connected to the securing members i.e. 140 wall which is all what claim 1,12 and 18 require. The new references above do teach a pivotable handle which is nothing inventive as its well known in the art to have such handles. Driscoll is still used to teach the fidget toy not the handle as applicant is suggesting.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRINCE PAL whose telephone number is (571)272-7525. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 9:30 AM - 7:30 PM (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, 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.
/PRINCE PAL/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights