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
In the Amended Claims of October 1, 2025, Claims 1-3, 11-13, 15, 18, 21-23, 25 and 27-30 are pending. Claims 1-3, 16, 18, 23, 25, 27 and 30 are amended.
Drawings
The drawings were received on July 3, 2025. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 11-13, 16, 18, 21-23, 25, 27, 29, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Antonia (US 2427335) in view of Scott (US 2019/0285225).
Regarding Claim 1, Antonia discloses a container (15) comprising a back wall having a back face with a T-shaped lug or finger (48) configured to mate with an upper socket (43) that is part of a wall bracket (42). While Antonia discloses that the upper socket has a central vertical slot, the details of the socket are not explicitly shown.
Scott discloses a similar container (21) having a back wall having a back face with a mounting socket (19). This mounting socket is configured with at least a front wall portion and a spaced apart back wall portion, the front wall portion and the back wall portion connected by side walls extending therebetween and a top wall portion in a configuration which complements the form of connection member (11) having a retention portion (15) with the edge (16). The back wall portion extends continuously between the side walls. The front wall portion, the back wall portion, the side walls and the top wall portion defining together a confined space along a longitudinal axis (as discussed in the channel structure described in Scott Paragraph 0121 and reproduced below) and has a bottom mounting opening therebetween opening into the confined space. The mounting socket of Scott is also mountable over a container mount (11). Antonia and Scott are analogous inventions in the art of wall-mountable containers with socket mounts.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the socket mounts of Antonia with the structure shown in Scott in order to provide a vertical downward limit to the container’s travel and prevent lateral movement of the connection member within the receiving portions (Paragraphs 0120-0122).
PNG
media_image1.png
1326
1148
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, while Antonia and Scott disclose only a single socket mounting means for each container, it is generally known in the art to provide two such sockets for wider containers to provide additional stability as seen in Harcz (US 91714542). This represents an obvious variation in the duplication of a socket mount that would provide no unexpected results in the function of the container mount.
Regarding Claim 2, Antonia discloses the container comprises a bottom mounting socket (44) that allows for the container to tilt forward after being lifted (Col. 5 Lines 3-28). This may be modified to have a bottom opening for receiving a bottom bracket as a reversal of parts to further support the container on a vertical surface.
Regarding Claim 11, Scott discloses the back wall portion of the mounting socket is shorter than a front wall portion thereof.
Regarding Claim 12, Scott discloses the front wall portion of the mounting sockets extends coplanar with an outside face of a back wall of the container.
Regarding Claim 13, Scott discloses the front wall portion of the mounting socket is part of the back surface of the back wall.
Regarding Claim 16, Scott discloses the mounting socket comprises an open portion at a back wall thereof and is mountable over a wall container mount having a T-like cross section.
Regarding Claim 18, Antonia discloses the container comprises a lid (33) pivotally hinged at a top of the back wall, and being displaceable between a closed position at which it bears over a top end of walls of the container, and at least a first open position at which it is disposed at an upright position.
Regarding Claim 21, the sockets and mounts seen in Antonia have a longitudinal axis of the top mounting sockets and of the at least one bottom mounting socket are parallel with one another.
Regarding Claims 22 and 23, Antonia discloses the outside, back wall surface of the bottom mounting socket can extend at the same plane of an outside face of the back wall of the container.
Regarding Claim 25, Antonia discloses the bottom mount has a T-like cross section which may be used as the container mount as a reversal of parts that would not impact the functioning of the container.
Regarding Claim 27, Antonia discloses a sliding axis of the top mounting sockets coincides with a sliding axis of the bottom socket.
Regarding Claim 29, Antonia discloses the back wall portion of the bottom mounting socket extends flush with a back face of a back wall of the container.
Regarding Claim 30, Antonia discloses there is tapered portion of the upper slot (Col. 4 Lines 51-54). This may be implemented as a longitudinal axis of each of the pair of top mounting sockets is inclined with respect to the back wall of the container, whereby said longitudinal axis intersects a plane of the back wall of the container.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Modified Antonia in view of Scott as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Smalley (US 8042700).
Regarding Claim 3, Modified Antonia discloses the limitations of Claim 1 as discussed above. Modified Antonia does not disclose container comprises, at a back wall thereof, a locking slot configurable for arresting engagement with a locking latch slidably displaceable therein.
Smalley discloses a similar tray container comprising dovetail T-mounts (44, 45) and corresponding sockets (55) wherein a back wall is configured with a locking slot (46) configurable for arresting engagement with a locking latch (52) slidably displaceable therein (Col. 4 Lines 39-62). Modified Antonia and Smalley are analogous inventions in the art of vertical surface mountable containers with dovetail or T-slot sockets.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the container of Modified Antonia with the locking slot and latch disclosed in Smalley in order to maintain and secure the container in position until it is desired to remove it from its position (Col. 4 Lines 57-62).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In particular, please note the connection structure of Nikolai (US 5718493) Figure 5.
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 GIDEON R. WEINERTH whose telephone number is (571)270-5121. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM 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, Orlando Aviles can be reached at (571) 270-5531. 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.
/GIDEON R WEINERTH/Examiner, Art Unit 3736