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
This office action is in response to the reply filed on 9/1/2026, wherein claims 1, 7-8 were amended, claim 3 is cancelled. Claims 1-2 and 4-12 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2 and 4-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 states "the at least one encoding body lock being fastenable to the lower side in positions that are interchangeable with the at least one encoding body, and the at least one encoding body lock having a blocking surface in a corresponding location to the opening in the at least one encoding body receptacle". This fails to appear in the as filed specification and appears to contradict the present invention. The first part of the statement is not true. The encoding body lock is not in fastenable positions that are interchangeable with at least one encoding body. In fact, the body is fastened to the upper portion and the lock is fastened to the lower portion. Instead, the encoding body lock can be used interchangeably with the encoding body receptacle. The second part of the statement is also seemingly untrue. On the lower side, either the encoding body receptacle or the encoding body lock is used, both do not exist in the same corner. Therefore, the blocking surface wouldn't have any locational correspondence with the opening in the an encoding body receptacle because there isn't a receptacle present when a lock is used. The claims positively state the presence of a lock and receptacle. Claims 2 and 4-12 directly or indirectly depend from claim 1 and are also rejected.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9,11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Moyer (US 20160095430 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Moyer discloses a container, comprising: a bottom (14’);side walls (216, further walls are shown in figure 18) connected to the bottom; at least one encoding body (32) that is adapted to project into an encoding body receptacle of another container; at least one encoding body receptacle (40) having an opening (52) that is sized to receive an encoding body of a further container; the at least one encoding body (32) being fastened to an upper side of one of the side walls by a connecting device (threads), which is releasable without destruction, and having a projection (threads of 32); the encoding body receptacle (40) being fastened to a lower side of one of the side walls, which lies opposite to the upper side, by a connecting device (top edge of 40) which is releasable without destruction; and at least one encoding body lock (another of 32) configured to block the introduction of the encoding body of the further container, the encoding body lock being fastened to the lower side of one of the side walls by a connecting device which is releasable without destruction, and the at least one encoding body lock (a 32) being fastenable to the lower side in positions that are interchangeable with the at least one encoding body (a different 32), and the at least one encoding body lock (protrusion 32) having a blocking surface in a corresponding location to the opening (52) in the at least one encoding body receptacle; and the lower side is in a region of a bottom of the container .
Examiner Note: The embodiment chosen would include a container on top of 14 in figure 12 that is attached as depicted in 12A. Meaning, it would be a stack of three containers, and the bottom and top of the central container is attached to other containers and all three components are located on a singular container.
PNG
media_image1.png
556
482
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Moyer discloses the container as claimed in claim 1, wherein the connecting device (threads of 32), which is releasable without destruction by which the at least one encoding body is fastened or is fastenable to one of the side walls, is a first connecting device (threads of 32), and the connecting device (top edge of 40), which is releasable without destruction by which the at least one encoding body receptacle is fastened or is fastenable to one of the side walls, is a second connecting device (top edge of 40).
With respect to claim 4, Moyer discloses the container as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the connecting device for the encoding body or the connecting device for the encoding body receptacle forms a positively locking connection. (square shape of the top edge of 40 prevents rotation)
With respect to claim 5, Moyer discloses the container as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the connecting device for the encoding body or the connecting device for the encoding body receptacle forms a non-positive locking connection. (threads of 32 can be considered positive)
With respect to claim 6, Moyer discloses the container as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the connecting device for the encoding body or the connecting device for the encoding body receptacle comprises a plug-in connection. (40 is made for insertion, and has openings that can be plugged)
With respect to claim 7, Moyer discloses the container as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the at least one encoding body, the at least one encoding body receptacle, or the at least one encoding body lock being fastened or being fastenable by the respective connecting device on or to the lower side of a respective one of the side walls. (as already stated by claim 1 for the encoding body lock and receptacle)
With respect to claim 8, Moyer discloses the container as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the at least one encoding body, the at least one encoding body receptacle, or the at least one encoding body lock being fastened or being fastenable by the respective connecting device on or to the upper side of a respective one of the side walls. (as already stated by claim 1 for the encoding body)
With respect to claim 9, Moyer discloses the container as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the connecting devices for the at least one encoding body, the at least one encoding body receptacle, or the at least one encoding body lock is actuatable either manually or without tools. (40 can be manual and 32 could be secured with tools)
With respect to claim 11, Moyer discloses the container as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the at least one encoding body, the at least one encoding body receptacle, or the at least one encoding body lock includes a disk-shaped element, and the disk- shaped element includes a part of the connecting device is releasable without destruction. (the encoding body receptacle 40, can include disc shaped element 60, especially when adjacent to other similar containers)
With respect to claim 12, Moyer discloses an arrangement comprising at least two of the containers as claimed in claim 1, the containers being stackable on one another, wherein the at least one encoding body (lower 32 of figure 12A) which is fastened to a first one of the containers is introducible exclusively in a single stack position sufficiently far into the at least one encoding body receptacle (40 of figure 12A) which is fastened to a second one of the containers in order to stack the containers on one another.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moyer (US 20160095430 A1) .
With respect to claim 10, the references as applied to claim 1, above, disclose all the limitations of the claims except for wherein at least one of the at least one encoding body, the at least one encoding body receptacle, or the at least one encoding body lock is configured in a different color than at least one of the side walls or the bottom. However, this can be seen as an obvious design choice in appearance and is considered not novel. A change in aesthetic (ornamental) design generally will not support patentability under the guidelines established In re Seid, 73 USPQ 431.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US-4366905-A OR US-5466057-A OR US-7472969-B2 OR US-5647181-A OR US-3874753-A OR US-3754805-A OR US-20210029976-A1 OR US-20180273314-A1 OR US-20240092531-A1 OR US-20220106076-A1 OR US-20140291193-A1 OR US-20170327270-A1 OR US-20160095430-A1
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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
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 extension fee 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 SYMREN K SANGHERA whose telephone number is (571)272-5305. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri.
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 on (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.
/S.K.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/ERNESTO A GRANO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights