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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Figs.1-4 and 15 and claims 1-2 and 4-15 in the reply filed on 07/31/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search burden to examine all 6 species. This is not found persuasive because all six species disclose different structure that would require 6 different searches, if all six species were so similar they would not be different species with different structure. Search for species A would be the same search for other species as examiner would have to search for other structures the other species do not have.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-2,4,9-13 and 15is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fenkel (US3155303A).
Regarding claim 1, Fenkel teaches a reservoir for minimizing loss of a liquid, the reservoir comprising (see annotated fig.10 of Fenkel below for a reservoir capable of minimizing loss of liquid):
a walled perimeter formed of at least one wall segment, the walled perimeter having a top edge and a bottom edge (see annotated fig.10 of Fenkel below for a wall segment that creates a walled perimeter having a top and bottom edge), and
a floor portion joined to the walled perimeter, thereby forming a liquid space configured to hold at least one volume of liquid, the floor portion comprising at least one indentation and having a lowest point, wherein the at least one indentation is provided in the lowest point of the floor portion (see annotated fig.10 of Fenkel below for a floor portion that is joined to the walled perimeter created by the wall segment and forms a liquid spaced that is capable of holding at least one volume of liquid and indentation provided at the lowest point on the floor portion).
Annotated fig.10 of Fenkel
PNG
media_image1.png
291
808
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches wherein the walled perimeter comprises a first wall segment, a second wall segment, a third wall segment, and a fourth wall segment, wherein the first and third wall segments are parallel to each other and the second and fourth wall segments are parallel to each other (fig.9 shows the walled perimeter is formed by four wall segments and the longer wall segments are parallel to each other and the smaller ones as well).
Regarding claim 4, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches wherein the walled perimeter is rectangular-shaped (fig.9 shows the walled perimeter being rectangular shape).
Regarding claim 9, the references as applied to claim 2 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches wherein each of the first wall segment, second wall segment, third wall segment, and fourth wall segment have a surface that face the liquid space and wherein the floor portion has at least one bottom surface facing the liquid space, wherein the four wall segment surfaces and the at least one bottom surface is resistant to one or more of the binding of protein, peptides, nucleotides, or nucleic acids (fig.9 shows the first, second, third, fourth and floor portion faces the liquid space and has a bottom surface facing the liquid space and the all surfaces are resistance to protein since it is a meat container which has protein ).
Regarding claim 10, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches wherein the walled perimeter and the floor portion comprise a polymer (fig.10 is formed of plastic material which is a type of polymer).
Regarding claim 11, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches wherein the floor portion comprises an inverted cone or pyramid (annotated fig.10 of Fenkel above shows the floor portion is an inverted cone).
Regarding claim 12, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches wherein the floor portion comprises a rectangular pyramid (annotated fig.10 of Fenkel above shows the floor portion is an rectangular pyramid; the shape is similar to applicant’s fig.2 so as much as applicant’s invention is a pyramid so is prior art).
Regarding claim 13, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches wherein the floor portion comprises an equilateral pyramid (annotated fig.10 of Fenkel above shows the floor portion is an equilateral pyramid; the shape is similar to applicant’s fig.2 so as much as applicant’s invention is a pyramid so is prior art).
Regarding claim 15, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches wherein the top edge is rectangular-shaped (annotated fig.10 of Fenkel above shows the top edge is rectangular shaped).
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Patterson (US20040142124A1).
Regarding claim 1, Patterson teaches a reservoir for minimizing loss of a liquid, the reservoir comprising (see annotated fig.1 of Patterson below for a reservoir capable of minimizing loss of liquid):
a walled perimeter formed of at least one wall segment, the walled perimeter having a top edge and a bottom edge (see annotated fig.1 of Patterson below for a wall perimeter that is created a four wall segments having a top and bottom edge at the bottom of the reservoir), and
a floor portion joined to the walled perimeter, thereby forming a liquid space configured to hold at least one volume of liquid, the floor portion comprising at least one indentation and having a lowest point, wherein the at least one indentation is provided in the lowest point of the floor portion (see annotated fig.1 of Patterson below for a floor portion that is joined to the walled perimeter created by the wall segment and forms a liquid spaced that is capable of holding at least one volume of liquid and indentation provided at the lowest point on the floor portion).
Annotated fig.1 of Patterson
PNG
media_image2.png
842
1015
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Patterson further teaches wherein the walled perimeter comprises a first wall segment, a second wall segment, a third wall segment, and a fourth wall segment, wherein the first and third wall segments are parallel to each other and the second and fourth wall segments are parallel to each other (see annotated fig.1 above shows the walled perimeter is formed by four wall segments and the first and third wall segments are parallel to each other and the second and fourth ones as well).
Regarding claim 5, the references as applied to claim 2 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Fenkel further teaches a projection on each of the first and third wall segments, the projection extending into the liquid space and positioned on the first and third wall segments at a nesting distance below the top edge of the walled perimeter (fig.1 above of Patterson above shows the projections that extend from first and third wall into the liquid space and positioned on the first and third segments at a nesting distance below the top edge of the wall as seen in fig.4).
Regarding claim 6, the references as applied to claim 2 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Patterson further teaches a projection on each of the second and fourth wall segments, the projection extending into the liquid space and positioned on the second and fourth wall segments at a nesting distance below the top edge of the walled perimeter (see annotated fig.1 above for the projection on the second and fourth wall segments and are nesting at a distance below top edge of the walled perimeter).
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) 7-8 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patterson (US20040142124A1).
Regarding claim 7, the references as applied to claim 6 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Patterson further teaches wherein the nesting distance (fig.1 of Patterson and fig.4 shows the protrusion are at multiple distances and can be placed as desired). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the nesting distance of Patterson to be about 2mm to 2.5mm in order to change the distances of protrusion and how far they are spaced from the top edge and the prior art shows they can be placed at multiple distances. To modify the distance of the protrusion from top into the claimed cap would entail a mere change in size of the components and yield only predictable results. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 8, the references as applied to claim 2 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Patterson further teaches wherein the first wall segment and third wall segments each have an inside length and wherein the second wall segment and fourth wall segments each have an inside width (annotated fig.1 of Patterson above shows the first and third walls segments having inside lengths and second and fourth segments having inside width ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the inside length of first and third walls and inside width of second and fourth wall of Patterson to be 126.2mm to 127.33 and 83.9mm to about 85mm in order to hold the desired amount of liquid inside the reservoir. To modify the inside length and width of the wall segments of Patterson into the claimed lengths and widths would entail a mere change in size of the components and yield only predictable results. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 14, the references as applied to claim 2 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Patterson further teaches wherein each of the first wall segment, second wall segment, third wall segment, and fourth wall segment has a thickness (annotated fig.1 and fig.4 shows each wall segments having a thickness). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified thickness of wall segments of Patterson to be about 0.55mm to about 0.60mm in order to achieve desired thickness that would be capable of holding the desired liquid applicant intends to put in the reservoir. To modify the thickness of wall segments into the claimed thickness would entail a mere change in size of the components and yield only predictable results. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
See PTO-892 for the prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRINCE PAL whose telephone number is (571)272-7525. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 9:30 AM - 7:30 PM (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, 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.
/PRINCE PAL/Examiner, Art Unit 3735