Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/464,637

Separable Modular Container

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Sep 11, 2023
Examiner
DEMEREE, CHRISTOPHER R
Art Unit
3734
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
5 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
6-7
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
1097 granted / 1594 resolved
-1.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
82 currently pending
Career history
1676
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
41.4%
+1.4% vs TC avg
§102
33.1%
-6.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1594 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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 and 8-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garretson (US 5772110 A) in view of Jaeschke et al. (US 4214659 A; hereinafter Jaeschke). Regarding claims 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 14-15, and 18-20, Garretson discloses a stackable series of interconnected boxes comprising a die cut panel (see Fig. 3) including a plurality of packages wherein a first package of the plurality of packages includes a pair of horizontal edges, wherein a first horizontal edge of the pair of horizontal edges is uncoupled and a second horizontal edge of the pair of horizontal edges is coupled to a third horizontal edge of an adjacent package (see illustration below), PNG media_image1.png 512 885 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein at least one additional package of the plurality of packages includes a pair of vertical edges (edges defining 36 and 37); and a pair of horizontal edges (19 and free edge of 17), wherein a first horizontal edge (19) of the pair of horizontal edges is coupled to a third horizontal edge of an adjacent package (Examiner notes that Garretson’s Figures 1-3 contemplate at least three adjacent packages), wherein one of the first horizontal edge or a second horizontal edge of the pair of horizontal edges includes a tear feature (19; Col 4 lines 30-49) configured to separate each package of the plurality of packages from one another. Examiner considers foldable paperboard to be a semi-flexible material. Garretson lacks a subcutaneous dose of medication held within each package. Jaeschke teaches an emergency medication package comprising a subcutaneous dose (V) of medication package (E) held within an outer box (see Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to modify Garretson’s packaging to be used to hold subcutaneous doses of medication, as taught by Jaeschke, in order to safely transport and deliver needed medication (Jaeschke; Col 1 lines 45-65). Regarding claims 3, 10-12, and 21, Garretson, as modified above, discloses a series of boxes wherein each of the plurality packages are sealable (via Garretson’s top lids; see Fig. 1). Regarding claims 16-17, Garretson, as modified above, discloses a series of boxes wherein the packages reside in sequential queue in a line when stretched out (Garretson; see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 22, Garretson, as modified above, discloses a container wherein the packages collapses onto another to form a compact box (Garretson; see Fig. 1). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 1-2, filed 08/19/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6, 8-12, and 14-20 under USC 102(a)(1)—in view of Garretson have been fully considered and are persuasive. Garretson lacks subcutaneous doses of medication. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of USC 103(a)—Garretson in view of Jaeschke. 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 CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE whose telephone number is (571)270-1982. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday. 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 J NEWHOUSE can be reached at (571)272-4544. 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. /CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 11, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 16, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 19, 2024
Response Filed
Jul 30, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 05, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 06, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 07, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 13, 2025
Response Filed
May 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 19, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595093
PACKING BOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595091
METHOD OF COLLAPSING A COLLAPSIBLE BOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589908
TAKEOUT FOOD BOX WITH EXTRA FOOD POCKET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582987
CARRIER DEVICE FOR A DISPENSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577031
BIODEGRADABLE COOLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+13.9%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1594 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month