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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/02/2026 has been entered.
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) 1-5, 7-8, 10-12, 14-15, 18, and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chinese Application CN 216454467 U to Wang et al. (“Wang”) in view of Japanese Application JP 2008-529916 A (“Japan”).
As to claim 1, Wang teaches a drinking vessel comprising: a beverage container (cup body 2) defining a drinking opening therethrough (Wang Fig. 1 shows the top of the cup body 2 is covered by a cup cover 1); a closure (cup cover 1) attachable to the beverage container to close the drinking opening (Wang, abstract); a first set of magnet units (second magnet 21) coupled to the beverage container (Wang Fig. 1 shows the second magnets 21 on the cup body 2); and a second set of magnet units (first magnet 11) coupled to the closure (Wang, pg. 5, ¶ n0024, lines 188-193), wherein when the closure is in a closed position (Wang, pg. 6, ¶ n0030, lines 238-244), magnetic attraction between at least one magnet unit of the first set of magnet units and at least one magnet unit of the second set of magnet units holds the closure in place relative to the beverage container (Wang, pg. 6, ¶ n0030, lines 238-244), thereby closing the drinking opening, and wherein when the closure is rotated away from the closed position, magnetic repulsion between at least one magnet unit of the first set of magnet units and at least one magnet unit of the second set of magnet units pushes the closure away from the beverage container (Wang, pg. 6, ¶ n0030, lines 240-242), thereby opening the drinking opening; but does not teach comprising a latching member pivotable inward relative to the closure to engage with the beverage container; and the latching member is pivoted relative to the closure to engage with the beverage container to further hold the closure in place.
Japan teaches comprising a latching member (latch arm 82) pivotable inward relative to the closure to engage with the beverage container (Japan, abstract); and the latching member is pivoted relative to the closure to engage with the beverage container to further hold the closure in place (Japan, abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the latch arm of Japan to modify the Wang reference in order to provide a cap secured by the latch to hold the lid in the closed position (Japan, pg. 4, line 19) in order to provide a smaller dispensing opening accessible without removing the base closure.
As to claim 2, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein when the closure is moved toward the drinking opening, magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction among the first set of magnet units and the second set of magnet units results in a force tending to rotate the closure toward the closed position (Wang, abstract).
As to claim 3, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units are spaced along a circumference of the beverage container and magnet units of the second set of magnet units are spaced along a circumference of the closure (Wang Fig. 2 shows the first magnets 11 spaced along a circumference of the cup cover 1 and second magnets 21 spaced along a circumference of the cup body 2).
As to claim 4, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 3, wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units, magnet units of the second set of magnet units, or both are each formed of individual arc-shaped magnets (Wang Fig. 2 shows the magnets 11 and 21 are arc-shaped magnets).
As to claim 5, Wang modified by Japan discloses the claimed invention except for wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units, magnet units of the second set of magnet units, or both are each formed of a group of adjacent rectangular magnets. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use rectangular shaped magnets, since applicant has not disclosed that rectangular shaped magnets solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with round shaped magnets.
As to claim 7, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 3, wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units, magnet units of the second set of magnet units, or both have a total arc length of at least 180 degrees (Wang Fig. 2 shows the magnets 11 and 21 have an arc length of at least 180 degrees).
As to claim 8, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 3, wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units, magnet units of the second set of magnet units, or both are arranged such that adjacent magnet units have opposite polarities (Wang, pg. 7, ¶ n0034).
As to claim 10, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein when the closure is in the closed position, each magnet unit of the first set of magnet units is positioned over a magnet unit of the second set of magnet units having the opposite polarity (Wang, pg. 7, ¶ n0035).
As to claim 11, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein the first set of magnet units comprises four magnet units and the second set of magnet units comprises four magnet units (Wang Fig. 2 shows at least four magnets 11).
As to claim 12, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein the first set of magnet units comprises four magnet units and the second set of magnet units comprises four magnet units, wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units and magnet units of the second set of magnet units are arranged such that adjacent magnet units have opposite polarities (Wang, pg. 7, ¶ n0034), and wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units and magnet units of the second set of magnet units have a total arc length of at least 180 degrees (Wang Fig. 2 shows the magnets 11 and 21 have an arc length of at least 180 degrees).
As to claim 14, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein the beverage container comprises a spout (Wang Fig. 1 shows a spout between the cup cover 1 and the second magnet 21) defining the drinking opening, and wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units are positioned circumferentially around the spout (Wang Fig. 1 shows the second magnet 21 is around the spout).
As to claim 15, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein the beverage container comprises an upward facing platform (Wang Fig. 1 shows the location of the magnets 21), wherein the closure comprises a downward facing rim (Wang Fig. 2 shows the location of the magnets 11) configured to be positioned above the upward facing platform of the beverage container when the closure is in the closed position (Wang Fig. 1 shows the cup cover 1 over the cup body 2), wherein the first set of magnet units is positioned below the upward facing platform of the beverage container (Wang, pg. 6, ¶ n0028), and wherein the second set of magnet units is positioned above the downward facing rim of closure (Wang, pg. 5, ¶ n0025).
As to claim 18, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein when the closure is in the closed position a sealing member (Wang, pg. 7, ¶ n0034) of the closure seals the drinking opening, and wherein when the closure is in the open position, the sealing member of the closure does not seal the drinking opening (Wang, pg. 7, ¶ n0034).
As to claim 21, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the beverage container comprises a latch stop configured to engage the latching member of the closure, and wherein when the closure is in the closed position, the latching member and latch stop further hold the closure in place.
Japan teaches wherein the beverage container comprises a latch stop (ledges 76, 78) configured to engage the latching member of the closure (Japan, pg. 4, lines 15-17), and wherein when the closure is in the closed position, the latching member and latch stop further hold the closure in place (Japan, pg. 4, lines 15-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ledges of Japan with the closure and container as taught by Wang to hold the lid in the closed position (Japan, pg. 4, line 19).
As to claim 22, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units (21) are spaced along a second circumference of the beverage container (Wang Fig. 1 shows the second magnets 21 on the cup body 2), and wherein magnet units of the second set of magnet units (first magnet 11) are spaced along a second circumference of the closure (Wang, pg. 5, ¶ n0024, lines 188-193); but does not teach wherein the closure comprises a plurality of latching members engagable with a plurality of latch stops provided on the beverage container, wherein when the closure is in the closed position, the plurality of latching members and the plurality of latch stops further hold the closure in place, wherein the latching members are spaced along a first circumference of the closure, wherein the latch stops are spaced along a first circumference of the beverage container.
Japan teaches wherein the closure comprises a plurality of latching members (tabs 86, 88) engagable with a plurality of latch stops (ledges 76, 78) provided on the beverage container, wherein when the closure is in the closed position, the plurality of latching members and the plurality of latch stops further hold the closure in place (Japan, pg. 4, lines 15-17), wherein the latching members are spaced along a first circumference of the closure (Japan Fig. 8 shows the tabs 86, 88 spaced along a first circumference), wherein the latch stops are spaced along a first circumference of the beverage container (Japan Fig. 8 shows the ledges 76, 78 spaced along a first circumference).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the tabs and ledges of Japan with the closure and container as taught by Wang to hold the lid in the closed position (Japan, pg. 4, line 19).
Claim(s) 6 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Japan further in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,382,450 B1 to De Rosa et al. (“De Rosa”).
As to claim 6, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 5, but does not teach wherein individual magnets of each group of adjacent rectangular magnets forming a magnet unit are spaced more closely to each other than to any other magnet in the set of magnet units to which they belong.
De Rosa teaches wherein individual magnets (magnet 11 in the container and magnet 16 in the lid) of each group of adjacent rectangular magnets forming a magnet unit are spaced more closely to each other than to any other magnet in the set of magnet units to which they belong (De Rosa Fig. 4 shows rectangular magnets 16 spaced closely to each other and Fig. 5 shows rectangular magnets 11 spaced closely to each other).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the position of the magnets of De Rosa with the vessel as taught by Wang modified by Japan to provide a packaging with a magnetic system for automatic relative positioned upon closure (De Rosa, abstract).
As to claim 13, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the first set of magnet units is formed as a unitary ring magnet, and wherein the second set of magnet units is formed as a unitary ring magnet.
De Rosa teaches wherein the first set of magnet units (rectangular magnets 11) is formed as a unitary ring magnet (De Rosa, col. 3, line 34), and wherein the second set of magnet units (rectangular magnets 16) is formed as a unitary ring magnet (De Rosa, col. 3, line 51).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ring magnets for the first and second sets of magnet units of De Rosa with the vessel as taught by Wang modified by Japan to reduce the number of components of the drinking vessel.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Japan further in view of U.S. PGPUB 2005/0133545 A1 to Find (“Find”).
As to claim 9, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 3, but does not teach wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units are spaced every 90 degrees along the circumference of the beverage container, magnet units of the second set of magnet units are spaced every 90 degrees along the circumference of the closure, or both.
Find teaches wherein magnet units of the first set of magnet units (magnets 3) are spaced every 90 degrees along the circumference of the beverage container (Find Fig. 1 shows the magnets 3 spaced ever 90 degrees), magnet units of the second set of magnet units are spaced every 90 degrees along the circumference of the closure, or both.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention use the spacing of the magnets of Find with the vessel as taught by Wang modified by Japan to reduce the material cost of the drinking vessel.
Claim(s) 16-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Japan further in view of U.S. PGPUB 2017/0121074 A1 to Seiders et al. (“Seiders”).
As to claim 16, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 15, but does not teach wherein portions of the platform positioned over magnet units of the second set of magnet units are formed of a material having a lower coefficient of static friction than the material forming portions of the platform that are not positioned over the magnet units of the second set of magnet units.
Seiders teaches wherein portions (seal portion 410D, Seiders, pg. 5, ¶ 0072) of the platform positioned over magnet units of the second set of magnet units are formed of a material having a lower coefficient of static friction than the material forming portions of the platform that are not positioned over the magnet units of the second set of magnet units (Seiders, pg. 5, ¶ 0072).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention use the seal portion of Seiders over the magnets as taught by Wang modified by Japan to use a suitable equivalent means to hold the magnets in to the container (Seiders, pg. 5, ¶ 0072).
As to claim 17, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, but does not teach wherein when the closure is in the closed position, the magnetic force between the first set of magnet units and the second set of magnet units is at least 1 lb.
Seiders wherein when the closure is in the closed position, the magnetic force between the first set of magnet units and the second set of magnet units is at least 1 lb (Seiders, pg. 4-5, ¶ 0069-0070).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a force produced by the magnets of Seiders with the vessel as taught by Wang modified by Japan to keep the container locked during normal operating conditions of the container (Seiders, pg. 4-5, ¶ 0070).
As to claim 19, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, but does not teach further comprising a lock to mechanically inhibit movement of the closure away from the closed position when the lock is in a locking position.
Seiders teaches further comprising a lock to mechanically inhibit movement of the closure away from the closed position when the lock is in a locking position (Seiders, pg. 3, ¶ 0060).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention add the locking of the lid of Seiders with the vessel as taught by Wang modified by Japan to lock in either the open or closed position (Seiders, pg. 3, ¶ 0060).
As to claim 20, Wang modified by Japan teaches the drinking vessel of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the beverage container comprises a spout comprising the first set of magnet units, and wherein the spout is detachable from a drinking vessel of the beverage container.
Seiders teaches wherein the beverage container comprises a spout (opening 112) comprising the first set of magnet units (magnet 474), and wherein the spout is detachable (Seiders Fig. 1B shows the lid 110 can be removed from the container 105) from a drinking vessel (container 105) of the beverage container.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention use the spout of Seiders with the vessel as taught by Wang modified by Japan to provide a lid assembly with a slider that can move between a closed position and an open position (Seiders, abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed 05/12/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 103 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 newly found prior art reference.
Conclusion
Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON LYNN POOS whose telephone number is (571)270-7427. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thus 10-3 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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
/M.L.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/JAMES N SMALLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Prosecution Insights