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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that neither Lester or Nini teach the claim limitation of “the body is equipped with a first central cylindrical geometry designed to impose a single opening dimension of the dispensing tap.” Applicant does not explain any further how the references cannot teach this limitation and simply states that each of the references “does not teach or show.” However, under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. MPEP 2111.01. In this case, the claim only requires that the body has a cylindrical geometry with a single opening dimensioned for the dispensing tap. Both Lester and Nini teach this limitation. In Lester body (40) is depicted with a cylindrical body with a central opening defined along axis (44) in Fig. 2A into which the dispensing tap (21, 58, 36, 42) is positioned therein with complementary dimensioning. Further, Nini teaches a cylindrical body (14) with a central opening (5) as depicted in Fig. 13 into which the dispensing tap (9, 11, 18) is positioned therein with complementary dimensioning. Drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed. In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (CCPA 1972). MPEP 2125. Further delineation is needed in the body of the claim to adequately define the claimed invention over the prior art of record.
In response to applicant's argument that Lester, Nini, and Blackbourn fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., mechanical stop or interlocking geometry that defines a predetermined opening dimension) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
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 6-11 are 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.
Regarding claims 6 and 9, the phrase "i.e." renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 7,8,10,11 are rejected for their incorporation of the above through their dependency of claims 6 and 9.
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) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by Lester (US Patent No. 7,997,461).
Re: Claim 9, Lester discloses the claimed invention including a tap for dispensing fluids from containers (embodiment of Fig. 2C) comprising:
a support body (40) (Fig. 2C);
an elastic actuating button (42) designed to allow and stop a fluid delivery, the elastic button being operatively connected to the support body (Depicted in Fig. 2C); and
a first stem or a second stem (36) designed to allow and interrupt a delivery of fluid, the first stem or the second stem being contained in the support body and being operatively connected and operated by the elastic button, the first stem or the second stem having an end placed in operative coupling with a fluid outlet end (26) of the body, the first stem or the second stem being equipped with closing lips (58) at the fluid outlet end of the support body (Fig. 2B-2C);
wherein the body is equipped with a first central cylindrical geometry designed to impose a single opening dimension of the dispensing tap, being operatively coupled, once the dispensing tap is open, with a second central cylindrical geometry with which the elastic button is equipped (Depicted in Fig. 2C); and
the first stem is designed for high viscosity fluids and therefore does not decrease the fluid passage section of the body (Fig. 2C, Col. 3, lines 56-64, clear flow path), the first stem having an end in operative coupling with the fluid outlet end of the body shaped with a substantially bell-shaped cross section (50), i.e. with sides almost perpendicular to the axis of the second stem and which end in closing lips of the outlet end of the body which are substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the second stem (Fig. 2C).
Re: Claim 10, Lester discloses the claimed invention including the first central cylindrical geometry consists of a first annular recess projecting inside the body and extending in an opposite direction with respect to an opening direction of the first stem or the second stem (Depicted in Fig. 2C), and the second central cylindrical geometry consists of a second annular recess projecting inside the elastic button and extending in the same direction with respect an opening direction of the firs stem or the second stem (Depicted in Fig. 2C), the first annular recess and the second annular recess coming into mutual contact when the delivering tap is in an opening phase and pouring fluids, obtaining a quantity of poured fluid which is always the same and controlled (Depicted in Fig. 2C).
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nini (US Patent No. 8,402,999).
Re: Claim 9, Nini discloses the claimed invention including a tap for dispensing fluids from containers (embodiment of Fig. 2C) comprising:
a support body (5) (Fig. 2);
an elastic actuating button (11 designed to allow and stop a fluid delivery, the elastic button being operatively connected to the support body (Depicted in Fig. 2); and
a first stem or a second stem (9) designed to allow and interrupt a delivery of fluid, the first stem or the second stem being contained in the support body and being operatively connected and operated by the elastic button, the first stem or the second stem having an ends placed in operative coupling with a fluid outlet end (14) of the body, the first stem or the second stem being equipped with closing lips (18) at the fluid outlet end of the support body (Fig. 2-5);
wherein the body is equipped with a first central cylindrical geometry designed to impose a single opening dimension of the dispensing tap, being operatively coupled, once the dispensing tap is open, with a second central cylindrical geometry with which the elastic button is equipped (Depicted in Fig. 2); and
the first stem is designed for high viscosity fluids and therefore does not decrease the fluid passage section of the body (Fig. 2), the first stem having an end in operative coupling with the fluid outlet end of the body shaped with a substantially bell-shaped cross section (16), i.e. with sides almost perpendicular to the axis of the second stem and which end in closing lips of the outlet end of the body which are substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the second stem. (Fig. 2).
Re: Claim 10, Nini discloses the claimed invention including the first central cylindrical geometry consists of a first annular recess (25) projecting inside the body and extending in an opposite direction with respect to an opening direction of the first stem or the second stem (Depicted in Fig. 2), and the second central cylindrical geometry consists of a second annular recess (84) projecting inside the elastic button and extending in the same direction with respect an opening direction of the firs stem or the second stem (Depicted in Fig. 5), the first annular recess and the second annular recess coming into mutual contact when the delivering tap is in an opening phase and pouring fluids, obtaining a quantity of poured fluid which is always the same and controlled (Depicted in Fig. 2C).
Re: Claim 11, Nini discloses the claimed invention including a liquid delivery channel (22) with a triangular cross-section conformation which allows delivering a maximum quantity of fluid regardless of the viscosity of the fluid, the liquid delivery channel being placed in the body connected to the container from which to deliver a fluid except for expressly stating a cross section (Col. 6, lines 3-7, Fig. 1 & 4 depicts channel opening outward in a triangular conformation).
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) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nini (US Patent No. 8,402,999) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Blackbourn (US Patent No. 6,470,910).
Re: Claim 6, Nini discloses the claimed invention as evidenced in the rejection of claim 9 above except for the stem having a triangular shape. However, Blackbourn discloses the art recognized alterative between a triangular stem end (20) (Fig. 2) and a bell-shaped stem end (70) (Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include either a triangular or bell-shaped stem end as taught by Blackbourn, since Blackbourn shows the equivalence of bell shaped and triangular shape for their use in the dispensing art as dispensing end configurations and the selection of any of these known equivalents to close an opening would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Re: Claim 7, Nini discloses the claimed invention including the first central cylindrical geometry consists of a first annular recess (25) projecting inside the body and extending in an opposite direction with respect to an opening direction of the first stem or the second stem (Depicted in Fig. 2), and the second central cylindrical geometry consists of a second annular recess (84) projecting inside the elastic button and extending in the same direction with respect an opening direction of the firs stem or the second stem (Depicted in Fig. 5), the first annular recess and the second annular recess coming into mutual contact when the delivering tap is in an opening phase and pouring fluids, obtaining a quantity of poured fluid which is always the same and controlled (Depicted in Fig. 2C).
Re: Claim 8, Nini discloses the claimed invention including a liquid delivery channel (22) with a triangular cross-section conformation which allows delivering a maximum quantity of fluid regardless of the viscosity of the fluid, the liquid delivery channel being placed in the body connected to the container from which to deliver a fluid except for expressly stating a cross section (Col. 6, lines 3-7, Fig. 1 & 4 depicts channel opening outward in a triangular conformation).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lester (US Patent No. 7,997,461) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Nini (US Patent No. 8,402,999).
Re: Claim 11, Lester discloses the claimed invention including a liquid delivery channel (24) with a cross-section conformation which allows delivering a maximum quantity of fluid regardless of the viscosity of the fluid, the liquid delivery channel being placed in the body connected to the container from which to deliver a fluid except for being expressly triangular. However, Nini teaches a liquid delivery channel (22)with a triangular cross-section (Col. 6, lines 3-7, triangular slanted sidewalls).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include either a triangular liquid delivery channel as taught by Nini, since Nini states col. 6, lines 5-7 that such a modification creates a liquid passage as big as possible to make liquid conveyance easier.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lester (US Patent No. 7,997,461) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Blackbourn (US Patent No. 6,470,910).
Re: Claim 6, Nini discloses the claimed invention as evidenced in the rejection of claim 9 above except for the stem having a triangular shape. However, Blackbourn discloses the art recognized alterative between a triangular stem end (20) (Fig. 2) and a bell-shaped stem end (70) (Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include either a triangular or bell-shaped stem end as taught by Blackbourn, since Blackbourn shows the equivalence of bell shaped and triangular shape for their use in the dispensing art as dispensing end configurations and the selection of any of these known equivalents to close an opening would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Re: Claim 7, Lester discloses the claimed invention including the first central cylindrical geometry consists of a first annular recess projecting inside the body and extending in an opposite direction with respect to an opening direction of the first stem or the second stem (Depicted in Fig. 2C), and the second central cylindrical geometry consists of a second annular recess projecting inside the elastic button and extending in the same direction with respect an opening direction of the firs stem or the second stem (Depicted in Fig. 2C), the first annular recess and the second annular recess coming into mutual contact when the delivering tap is in an opening phase and pouring fluids, obtaining a quantity of poured fluid which is always the same and controlled (Depicted in Fig. 2C).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lester (US Patent No. 7,997,461) and Blackbourn (US Patent No. 6,470,910) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Nini (US Patent No. 8,402,999).
Re: Claim 8, Lester discloses the claimed invention including a liquid delivery channel (24) with a cross-section conformation which allows delivering a maximum quantity of fluid regardless of the viscosity of the fluid, the liquid delivery channel being placed in the body connected to the container from which to deliver a fluid except for being expressly triangular. However, Nini teaches a liquid delivery channel (22)with a triangular cross-section (Col. 6, lines 3-7, triangular slanted sidewalls).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include either a triangular liquid delivery channel as taught by Nini, since Nini states col. 6, lines 5-7 that such a modification creates a liquid passage as big as possible to make liquid conveyance easier.
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 CHARLES P. CHEYNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 pm.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/CHARLES P. CHEYNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754