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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/15/2025 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 23 is currently marked as “original”, however the claim appears to be amended. As such, the claim is being interpreted as being “currently amended”.
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. Based on the Applicant’s claims, the Applicant appears to be claiming the embodiment shown in Fig. 10 and 11. Therefore, the grasping body being outwardly spaced apart from the spout so as to form an axial space therebetween, and a grasping body depending wall which is axially spaced apart from the spout engaging wall that defines the spout engaging bore, such that the grasping body depending wall is substantially larger than the spout engaging wall must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 212 and 239.
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 Objections
Claim 34 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 34 currently states “…the dispensing cover having an cap outer rim, wherein the outer flange and the outer rim interface in a closed configuration.” The Examiner believes the claim was intended to state “…the dispensing cover having [[an]] the cap outer rim, wherein the outer flange and the cap outer rim interface in a closed configuration.” Appropriate correction is required.
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 21-31 and 33-39 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.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the spout engaging wall" in lines 14-15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 references “a grasping body outer surface” and “a grasping body depending wall”. It’s unclear if the outer surface and the depending wall are the same or if they are different parts of the grasping body. For the purposes of further examination, they are being interpreted as being the same part of the grasping body.
Claim 33 recites the limitation "the grasping wall" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 33 recites the limitation "the spout engaging wall" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 21-23 and 25-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrey et al. (US 2022/0062104) (hereinafter Andrey) and Fillmore (US 4778071).
Regarding Claim 21
Andrey teaches a pouch assembly (below – Fig. 11 and 5) comprising: a pouch (131) with a pouch body being flexible and defining a volume and a spout (141) providing fluid communication with the volume; a dispensing cap (10) coupled to the spout in fluid tight engagement, the dispensing cap comprising: a grasping body (11) having an outer surface, and the grasping body having a lower end which is spaced apart from the pouch body, with the grasping body being outwardly spaced apart from the spout (via the wall thickness) so as to form an axial space therebetween, inasmuch as Applicant shows; a spout engaging bore (shown at 21) structurally configured to engage the spout; a spout engaging end (42) having an outlet opening that is in fluid communication with the spout, and in turn, the volume, the spout engaging end having an outer surface (shown below) on its upper side that extends perpendicular (horizontal) to the spout engaging bore (vertical), and an outer rim defined along a perimeter of the outer surface, the spout engaging end being configured such that the grasping body defines a grasping body depending wall (outer surface) which is axially spaced apart from the spout engaging wall (via the wall thickness) that defines the spout engaging bore, such that the grasping body depending wall is substantially larger than the spout engaging bore, inasmuch as Applicant shows; and a dispensing coupling (12) extending from the spout engaging end, with the dispensing coupling being in fluid communication with the outlet opening, the dispensing coupling comprising an ENFit® coupling; a cover (70) positionable to overlie the dispensing coupling comprising: a bore cover extending from an inner surface of the cover, structurally configured to engage a terminal end of the dispensing coupling (Paragraphs [0034]-[0038]).
[AltContent: textbox (Outer surface)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
672
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
440
306
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Andrey does not teach the dispensing cover further comprising: a cap outer rim engaging the outer rim of the spout engaging end; and a live hinge assembly having: a pair of spaced apart live hinge components, each having a first end coupled to the outer surface of the grasping body proximate the outer rim of the spout engaging end, and a second end coupled to the dispensing cover proximate the cap outer rim; and a limiting member positioned between each of the live hinge components, the limiting member having a first end coupled to the outer surface of the grasping body proximate the outer rim of the spout engaging end, and a second end coupled to the dispensing cover, whereupon a user can grasp the outer surface of the grasping body with a portion of a hand while being able to manipulate the dispensing cover between a first closed orientation and a second open orientation with the same hand which remains spaced apart from the pouch body.
Fillmore teaches a container assembly (Fig. 1 and 3-5) comprising: a container with a container body defining a volume and a spout (not shown) providing fluid communication with the volume; a dispensing cap (10) coupled to the spout in fluid tight engagement, the dispensing cap comprising: a grasping body (11) having an outer surface (26), and the grasping body having a lower end which is spaced apart from the container body; a spout engaging bore (shown at 20) structurally configured to engage the spout; a spout engaging end (14) having an outlet opening that is in fluid communication with the spout, and in turn, the volume, the spout engaging end having an outer surface on its upper side that extends perpendicular to (horizontal) the spout engaging bore (vertical), and an outer rim (16) defined along a perimeter of the outer surface; and a dispensing coupling (17) extending from the spout engaging end, with the dispensing coupling being in fluid communication with the outlet opening; a dispensing cover (12) positionable to overlie the dispensing coupling, the dispensing cover further comprising: a cap outer rim (23) engaging the outer rim of the spout engaging end (Fig. 5); a bore cover (24) extending from an inner surface of the dispensing cover, structurally configured to engage a terminal end of the dispensing coupling; and a live hinge assembly having: a pair of spaced apart live hinge components (30), each having a first end coupled to the outer surface of the grasping body proximate the outer rim of the spout engaging end, and a second end coupled to the dispensing cover proximate the cap outer rim; and a limiting member (31) positioned between each of the live hinge components, the limiting member having a first end coupled to the outer surface of the grasping body proximate the outer rim of the spout engaging end, and a second end coupled to the dispensing cover, whereupon a user can grasp the outer surface of the grasping body with a portion of a hand while being able to manipulate the dispensing cover between a first closed orientation and a second open orientation with the same hand which remains spaced apart from the container body (Col. 2, Ln. 20 – Col. 3, Ln. 38).
PNG
media_image3.png
552
372
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
528
545
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Andrey and Fillmore are analogous inventions in the field of dispensing caps having dispensing couplings and covers. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the cap of Andrey with the teachings of the cap of Fillmore (particularly the dispensing cover) in order to provide a cover that is retained on the cap and also allows the user to use with one finger (Col. 2, Ln. 53-56).
Regarding Claim 22
Andrey in view of Fillmore (hereinafter “modified Andrey”) teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as stated above. Fillmore further teaches an outer flange (16) extending from the spout engaging end (14), and the dispensing cover (12) having the cap outer rim (23), wherein the outer flange and the outer rim interface in a closed configuration, as can be seen in Fig. 5 above.
Regarding Claim 23
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as stated above. Fillmore further teaches a finger (27) extending from the dispensing cover (12) opposite the live hinge assembly (31/30), the finger facilitating movement of the dispensing cover about the live hinge-configuration.
Regarding Claim 25
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as stated above. Andrey further teaches the pouch (131) is more than capable of including human breast milk.
Regarding Claim 26
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as stated above. Fillmore further teaches an outward flange (16) extends about the entirety of the perimeter of the outer surface of the spout engaging end (14).
Regarding Claim 27
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 26 as stated above. Andrey further teaches the entirety of the outer surface of the spout engaging end (42) within a perimeter comprises a planar configuration surrounding the dispensing coupling (12) which is centrally located.
Regarding Claim 28
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as stated above. Andrey further teaches the dispensing cap (10) is threadedly (21/142) engaged to the spout (141) of the pouch.
Regarding Claim 29
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as stated above. Andrey further teaches the pouch body (131) is formed from a plurality of panels coupled together through at least one seal, with the spout having a base flange (shown below in an expanded view of Fig. 11) coupled to the plurality of panels about the at least one seal.
[AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image5.png
271
330
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 30
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as stated above. Andrey further teaches the spout (141) includes a base flange (shown above) with the base flange defining a footprint. Modified Andrey does not specifically teach the outer surface of the grasping body extends beyond the footprint of the base flange of the spout.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to have the outer surface of the grasping body extends beyond the footprint of the base flange of the spout, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A). Further, Applicant has not disclosed that the outer surface of the grasping body extending beyond the footprint of the base flange of the spout provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose or solves a stated problem. As such, the claim of the outer surface of the grasping body extending beyond the footprint of the base flange of the spout does not provide patentable distinction over the prior art of record.
Regarding Claim 31
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as stated above. Andrey further teaches grasping body (11) has a substantially cylindrical configuration.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Andrey as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Davis et al. (US 9926185) (hereinafter Davis).
Regarding Claim 24
Modified Andrey teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as shown above. Modified Andrey does not teach the ENFit® coupling further includes an elongated bore with an outer surface, the outer surface including a frustoconical portion extending from the spout engaging end and terminating at a beveled portion.
Davis teaches a container assembly (below – Fig. 1, 2, and 4) comprising: a container (B) with a container body and a spout providing fluid communication with the volume; a dispensing cap (10) coupled to the spout in fluid tight engagement, the dispensing cap comprising: a grasping body (28) having an outer surface, and the grasping body having a lower end which is spaced apart from the pouch body; a spout engaging bore (i.e. inner surface of 28) structurally configured to engage the spout; a spout engaging end (22) having an outlet opening that is in fluid communication with the spout, and in turn, the volume; and a dispensing coupling (24) extending from the spout engaging end, with the dispensing coupling being in fluid communication with the outlet opening, the dispensing coupling comprising an ENFit® coupling; a dispensing cover (38) positionable to overlie the dispensing coupling, the dispensing cover further comprising: a bore cover (42) extending from an inner surface of the dispensing cover, structurally configured to engage a terminal end of the dispensing coupling; and a live hinge assembly having: a hinge component (46); and wherein the ENFit® coupling further includes an elongated bore with an outer surface, the outer surface including a frustoconical portion extending from the spout engaging end and terminating at a beveled portion, as can be seen in Fig. 4 below (Col. 5, Ln. 1-27).
PNG
media_image6.png
495
301
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
646
566
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Andrey and Davis are analogous inventions in the field of container assemblies with ENFit® couplings. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the ENFit® coupling of Andrey with the teachings of the ENFit® coupling of Davis as the two are functional equivalents able to achieve the predictable result of an ENFit® coupling that is able to be closed by a dispensing cover and attach to an eternal feeding system. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Claim(s) 33-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fillmore (US 4778071) in view of Davis et al. (US 9926185) (hereinafter Davis).
Regarding Claim 33
Fillmore teaches a dispensing cap (Fig. 1 and 3-5) structurally capable of attachment to a spout of a pouch assembly having a spout, the dispensing cap (10) comprising: a grasping body (11) having an outer surface (26), and the grasping body having a lower end which is spaced apart from the container body, with the grasping body being outwardly spaced apart from the spout (via the wall thickness) so as to form an axial space therebetween (inasmuch as Applicant shows); a spout engaging bore (shown at 20) structurally configured to engage the spout which is inwardly axially spaced apart from the outer surface of the grasping body (via the wall thickness) such that a grasping wall is substantially larger than a spout engaging wall (inasmuch as Applicant shows); a spout engaging end (14) having an outlet opening that is in fluid communication with the spout, and in turn, the volume, the spout engaging end having an outer surface on its upper side (shown above) that extends perpendicular (horizontal) to the spout engaging bore (vertical), and an outer rim (16) defined along a perimeter of the outer surface; and a dispensing coupling (17) extending from the spout engaging end, with the dispensing coupling being in fluid communication with the outlet opening; a dispensing cover (12) positionable to overlie the dispensing coupling, the dispensing cover further comprising: a cap outer rim engaging the outer rim of the spout engaging end (Fig. 5); a bore cover (24) extending from an inner surface of the dispensing cover, structurally configured to engage a terminal end of the dispensing coupling; and a live hinge assembly having: a pair of spaced apart live hinge components (30), each having a first end coupled to the outer surface of the grasping body proximate the outer rim of the spout engaging end, and a second end coupled to the dispensing cover proximate the cap outer rim; and a limiting member (31) positioned between each of the live hinge components, the limiting member having a first end coupled to the outer surface of the grasping body proximate the outer rim of the spout engaging end, and a second end coupled to the dispensing cover, whereupon a user can grasp the outer surface of the grasping body with a portion of a hand while being able to manipulate the dispensing cover with the same hand between a first closed orientation and a second open orientation with the same hand which remains spaced apart from the container (or pouch) body (Col. 2, Ln. 20 – Col. 3, Ln. 38).
Fillmore does not teach the dispensing coupling comprising an ENFit® coupling.
Davis teaches a dispensing cap (Fig. 1, 2, and 4) structurally capable of attachment to a spout of a pouch assembly, the dispensing cap (10) comprising: a grasping body (28) having an outer surface, and the grasping body having a lower end which is spaced apart from the pouch body; a spout engaging bore (i.e. inner surface of 28) structurally configured to engage the spout; a spout engaging end (22) having an outlet opening that is in fluid communication with the spout, and in turn, the volume; and a dispensing coupling (24) extending from the spout engaging end, with the dispensing coupling being in fluid communication with the outlet opening, the dispensing coupling comprising an ENFit® coupling; a dispensing cover (38) positionable to overlie the dispensing coupling, the dispensing cover further comprising: a bore cover (42) extending from an inner surface of the dispensing cover, structurally configured to engage a terminal end of the dispensing coupling; and a live hinge assembly having: a hinge component (46) (Col. 5, Ln. 1-27).
Fillmore and Davis are analogous inventions in the field of dispensing dispensing caps. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the dispensing coupling of Fillmore with the teachings of the ENFit® coupling of Davis in order to provide a cap able to be used for enteral feeding (Col. 5, Ln. 1-27).
Regarding Claim 34
Fillmore in view of Davis (hereinafter “modified Fillmore”) teaches all the limitations of claim 33 as stated above. Fillmore further teaches an outer flange (16) extending from the spout engaging end (14), and the dispensing cover (12) having a cap outer rim, wherein the outer flange and the outer rim interface in a closed configuration, as can be seen in Fig. 5 above.
Regarding Claim 35
Modified Fillmore teaches all the limitations of claim 33 as stated above. Fillmore further teaches a finger (27) extending from the dispensing cover (12) opposite the live hinge assembly (31/30), the finger facilitating movement of the dispensing cover about the live hinge-configuration.
Regarding Claim 36
Modified Fillmore teaches all the limitations of claim 33 as stated above. Davis further teaches the ENFit® coupling (24) further includes an elongated bore with an outer surface, the outer surface including a frustoconical portion extending from the spout engaging end and terminating at a beveled portion, as can be seen in Fig. 4 above (Col. 5, Ln. 1-27)
Regarding Claim 37
Modified Fillmore teaches all the limitations of claim 33 as stated above. Fillmore further teaches an outward flange (16) extends about the entirety of the perimeter of the outer surface of the spout engaging end (14).
Regarding Claim 38
Modified Fillmore teaches all the limitations of claim 37 as stated above. Fillmore further teaches the entirety of the outer surface of the spout engaging end (14) within a perimeter comprises a planar configuration surrounding the dispensing coupling (17).
Fillmore does not specifically teach the dispensing coupling is centrally located. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made have the dispensing coupling centrally located on the spout engaging end, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Regarding Claim 39
Modified Fillmore teaches all the limitations of claim 33 as stated above. Fillmore further teaches grasping body (11) has a substantially cylindrical configuration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach “the spout engaging end being configured such that the grasping body defines a grasping body depending wall which is axially spaced apart from the spout engaging wall that defines the spout engaging bore, such that the grasping body depending wall is substantially larger than the spout engaging wall”. However, based on the claim limitations, the Applicant appears to be claiming the embodiment shown in Fig. 10 and 11, which does not show this limitation. As such, the claims have been interpreted and addressed above as best the Examiner can understand in light of the figures shown.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER CASTRIOTTA whose telephone number is (571)270-5279. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at (571) 270-5055. 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.
/JENNIFER CASTRIOTTA/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/DON M ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733