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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “membrane” in claim 29 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-35 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 claim 1, 17, 28, “the receptacles” lack antecedent basis and is it unclear what it is referring to. Furthermore, it is unclear if the recited “at least one of the receptacles” is referring to the already recited “at least one receptacle” or to a second receptacle.
Regarding claims 1, 17, 28, “the adjacent compartment” lacks antecedent basis and it is unclear what it is referring to.
Regarding claim 2, the scope of the claims is unclear it fails to define the metes and bounds of the claim limitation with the recitation of a second receptacle. In particular, it is unclear if applicant is claiming a plurality of receptacles or one receptacle.
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) 1-4, 6-7, 10-20, 23-28, 30-31, 33-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by US Patent No. 4,170,300 to Pick.
Regarding claim 1, Pick discloses a tray (10, Fig 1) for holding products (intended use), the tray comprising a top surface (12) having a plurality of compartments (16, 18, 20, 22) extending downwardly therefrom, each compartment comprising a bottom wall and at least one sidewall extending between the bottom wall and tray top surface (Fig 2), wherein the bottom wall of each compartment is generally parallel to the tray top surface (Fig 2), at least one receptacle (46) adjacent one of the compartments, the at least one receptacle (46) comprising a bottom wall and at least one sidewall extending between the bottom wall and tray top surface, wherein the bottom wall of the receptacle is angular with respect to tray top surface (Fig 2), wherein at least one of the receptacles (46) is separated from the adjacent compartment by a dividing member (B, Figs 1, 2 below) of the top surface of the tray, wherein a first compartment (22) is configured to house a solid food component since it has the structure as recited, second compartment (16) configured to house a non-solid food component since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 2, Pick further discloses first and second receptacle (46) adjacent first and second compartments (16, 22).
Regarding claim 3, Pick further discloses bottom wall of the first receptacle (46) angled in direction of first compartment (16) and bottom wall of second receptacle (46) angled in direction of second compartment (22).
Regarding claim 4, Pick further discloses sidewall of the receptacle (46) being angular with respect to tray top surface (12) since the receptacle is an indentation.
Regarding claims 6-7, Pick discloses the tray of claims 1, 4 but does not teach the angle of the bottom wall and sidewall as recited. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize the angles to the range as recited in order to facilitate holding of the content since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 10, Pick further discloses a flange (60) extends outwardly from tray top surface (12).
Regarding claim 11, Pick further discloses first (22) and second compartment (16) separated by a first dividing member (A, Fig 1 below) of the top surface of the tray.
Regarding claim 12, Pick further discloses second receptacle (46) separated from the second compartment (16) by second dividing member (B, Fig 1 below) of the top surface of the tray, wherein the first receptacle (46) is not separated from the first compartment (22) by a dividing member, wherein the first receptacle (46) is connected to an upper portion of a sidewall (A, Fig 2 below) of the first compartment (22) (Fig 2).
Regarding claim 13, Pick further discloses sidewall (A, Fig 2 below) connecting the first receptacle (46) to first compartment (22) is configured to curve outwardly (Fig 2 below).
Regarding claim 14, Pick further discloses the curved sidewall (A, Fig 2 below) allows a user to access as recited since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 15, Pick further discloses second receptacle (46) capable of being used in the manner as recited since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 16, Pick further discloses angled bottom wall of first receptacle (46) allows a user to peel off the membrane since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 17, Pick discloses a tray (10, Fig 1) for holding products (intended use), the tray comprising a top surface (12) having a plurality of compartments (16, 18, 20, 22) extending downwardly therefrom, each compartment comprising a bottom wall and at least one sidewall extending between the bottom wall and tray top surface (Fig 2), wherein the bottom wall of each compartment is generally parallel to the tray top surface (Fig 2), at least one receptacle (46) adjacent on the of the compartments, the at least one receptacle (46) comprising a bottom wall and at least one sidewall extending between the bottom wall and tray top surface, wherein the bottom wall of the receptacle is angular with respect to tray top surface (Fig 2), wherein a first compartment (22) is adjacent a first receptacle (46), a second compartment (16) adjacent a second receptacle (46), wherein at least one of the receptacle (46) is separated from the adjacent compartment by a dividing member (B, Figs 1, 2 below) of the top surface of the tray. In particular, Pick discloses a plurality of receptacles (46).
Regarding claim 18, Pick further discloses wherein a first compartment (22) is configured to house a solid food component since it has the structure as recited, second compartment (16) configured to house a non-solid food component since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 19, Pick further discloses bottom wall of the first receptacle (46) angled in direction of first compartment (16) and bottom wall of second receptacle (46) angled in direction of second compartment (22).
Regarding claim 20, Pick further discloses sidewall of the receptacle (46) being angular with respect to tray top surface (12) since the receptacle is an indentation.
Regarding claim 23, Pick further discloses first (22) and second compartment (16) separated by a first dividing member (A, Fig 1 below) of the top surface of the tray.
Regarding claim 24, Pick further discloses second receptacle (46) separated from the second compartment (16) by second dividing member (B, Fig 1 below) of the top surface of the tray, wherein the first receptacle (46) is not separated from the first compartment (22) by a dividing member, wherein the first receptacle (46) is connected to an upper portion of a sidewall (A, Fig 2 below) of the first compartment (22) (Fig 2).
Regarding claim 25, Pick further discloses sidewall (A, Fig 2 below) connecting the first receptacle (46) to first compartment (22) is configured to curve outwardly (Fig 2 below).
Regarding claim 26, Pick further discloses the curved sidewall (A, Fig 2 below) allows a user to access as recited since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 27, Pick further discloses second receptacle (46) capable of being used in the manner as recited since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 28, Pick discloses a tray (10, Fig 1) for holding a plurality of products (intended use), the tray comprising a top surface (12) having a plurality of compartments (16, 18, 20, 22) extending downwardly therefrom, each compartment comprising a bottom wall and at least one sidewall extending between the bottom wall and tray top surface (Fig 2), wherein the bottom wall of each compartment is generally parallel to the tray top surface (Fig 2), at least one receptacle (46) adjacent one of the compartments, the receptacle comprising a bottom wall and at least one sidewall extending between the bottom wall and tray top surface, wherein the bottom wall of the at least one receptacle is angular with respect to tray top surface (Fig 2), wherein a first compartment (22) is adjacent a first receptacle (46), wherein a second compartment (16) is adjacent a second receptacle (46), wherein the first receptacle (46) is connected to an upper portion of a sidewall of the first compartment (22, Fig 2), wherein at least one of the receptacles (46) is separated from the adjacent compartment by a dividing member (B, Figs 1, 2 below) of the top surface of the tray.
Regarding claim 30, Pick further discloses bottom wall of the first receptacle (46) angled in direction of first compartment (16) and bottom wall of second receptacle (46) angled in direction of second compartment (22).
Regarding claim 31, Pick further discloses sidewall of the receptacle (46) being angular with respect to tray top surface (12) since the receptacle is an indentation.
Regarding claim 33, Pick further discloses first (22) and second compartment (16) separated by a first dividing member (A, Fig 1 below) of the top surface of the tray and second receptacle (46) separated from the second compartment (16) by second dividing member (B, Fig 1 below) of the top surface of the tray, wherein the first receptacle (46) is not separated from the first compartment (22) by a dividing member, wherein the first receptacle (46) is connected to an upper portion of a sidewall (A, Fig 2 below) of the first compartment (22) (Fig 2).
Regarding claim 34, Pick further discloses sidewall (A, Fig 2 below) connecting the first receptacle (46) to first compartment (22) is configured to curve outwardly (Fig 2 below) allows a user to access as recited since it has the structure as recited.
Regarding claim 35, Pick further discloses second receptacle (46) capable of being used in the manner as recited since it has the structure as recited.
PNG
media_image1.png
814
638
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
665
312
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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) 5, 21, 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pick in view of US 2009/0021058 to Rajack et al. (Rajack).
Regarding claim 5, Pick teaches the tray of claim 1 but does not explicitly teach the receptacle having three sidewalls. However, Rajack discloses a tray (Fig 1) and in particular discloses the tray comprising receptacles (38) having an angled bottom wall and three sidewalls extending between the bottom wall and tray top surface (30). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have three sidewalls for the Pick receptacle as suggested by Rajack in order to facilitate holding of the content.
Regarding claim 21, 32, Pick teaches the tray of claim 17, 28 but does not explicitly teach the receptacle having three sidewalls. However, Rajack discloses a tray (Fig 1) and in particular discloses the tray comprising receptacles (38) having an angled bottom wall and three sidewalls extending between the bottom wall and tray top surface (30). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have three sidewalls for the Pick receptacle as suggested by Rajack in order to facilitate holding of the content.
Claim(s) 8-9, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pick in view of US Patent No. 5,441,152 to Estes.
Regarding claim 8, Pick teaches the tray of claim 1 but does not teach a top surface sidewall. However, Estes discloses a tray (10, Fig 1) and in particular discloses a top surface side wall (16) extending downwards from a tray top surface (14) circumscribing a plurality of compartments (36, 42, 38) and at least one receptacle (32). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a circumscribing side wall extending downwards from top surface of Pick as suggested by Estes in order to strengthen the tray structure.
Regarding claim 9, the modified Pick teaches the tray of claim 8 and further teaches a flange (12) extending outwardly from top surface sidewall (16) (Fig 1, 4).
Regarding claim 22, Pick teaches the tray of claim 17 but does not teach a top surface sidewall. However, Estes discloses a tray (10, Fig 1) and in particular discloses a top surface side wall (16) extending downwards from a tray top surface (14) circumscribing a plurality of compartments (36, 42, 38) and at least one receptacle (32). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a circumscribing side wall extending downwards from top surface of Pick as suggested by Estes in order to strengthen the tray structure.
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pick in view of US 2003/0192898 to Haedt.
Regarding claim 29, Pick discloses the tray of claim 28 and further discloses wherein a first compartment (22) is configured to house a solid food component since it has the structure as recited, second compartment (16) configured to house a non-solid food component since it has the structure as recited. Pick does not teach the first and second compartments are covered by at least one membrane. However, Haedt discloses a tray (Fig 1) with first and second compartments (28a-28d) covered by at least one membrane (52). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate a membrane to the Pick tray as suggested by Haedt in order to cover and seal the contents.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Initially, it is noted that applicant does not argue the rejection of the dependent claims. Applicant argues that prior art does not teach a dividing member between the receptacle and compartment. This is not persuasive because as shown in marked Fig 1 and Fig 2 above, a dividing member on the top surface of the tray is shown in (B) which separates the receptacle and an adjacent compartment.
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 ROBERT POON whose telephone number is (571)270-7425. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:30 am to 6:00 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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (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.
/ROBERT POON/ Examiner, Art Unit 3735