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
Claims 1, 4, 6-7-16 are pending.
Claims 2-3, 5 are canceled.
Claims 8-16 are withdrawn.
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) 1, 4, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holbrook (US D726026) in view of Sullivan (US 8857636).
Regarding claim 1, Holbrook discloses, A storage apparatus consisting of: a main container (See annotated fig. below) having a mouth at a top (See annotated fig. below) and a closed base (See annotated fig. below), the main compartment has spray functionality, wherein a spray head is coupled to the mouth of the main compartment (Fig. 1), a first additional compartment having an open top and a closed base (See annotated fig. below), the first additional compartment has ventilation holes (See annotated fig. below) in opposite walls of the first additional compartment, the first additional compartment is isolated from the main compartment .
PNG
media_image1.png
586
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Holbrook does not explicitly disclose the first additional compartment has two ventilation holes in opposite walls.
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 Holbrook to have first additional compartment has two ventilation holes in opposite walls as the number of holes recognized as a simple matter of design choice1. The written description fails to provide any criticality associated with this limitation.
However, Holbrook does not explicitly disclose, a first interlocking member disposed at a lower wall portion of the main compartment, a second interlocking member disposed at an upper wall portion of the first additional compartment, wherein the first interlocking member and the second interlocking member are configured to engage for coupling the first additional compartment to the main compartment the first additional compartment has a first interlocking member disposed at a lower wall portion thereof.
Sullivan discloses, a first interlocking member (See annotated fig. below) disposed at a lower wall portion of the main compartment, a second interlocking member (See annotated fig. below) disposed at an upper wall portion of the first additional compartment, wherein the first interlocking member and the second interlocking member are configured to engage for coupling the first additional compartment to the main compartment the first additional compartment has a first interlocking member disposed at a lower wall portion thereof (See annotated fig. below).
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 Holbrook to incorporate a snap fitting mechanism having a first and second interlocking member as taught by Sullivan for the purpose of having an improved securement while also providing easy disassembly in between the two containers.
PNG
media_image2.png
616
695
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Holbrook does not explicitly disclose, the storage apparatus further comprises a second additional compartment, the second additional compartment has a second interlocking member disposed at an upper wall portion thereof
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a second and a third additional compartment configured to couple to the compartment above in order to allow for additional storage, since such a modification would amount to a mere duplication of parts. It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI,B)
As a result of such duplication, the resultant structure would have a second additional compartment, the second additional compartment has a second interlocking member disposed at an upper wall portion thereof.
The limitation “the second interlocking member of the second additional compartment and the first interlocking member of the first additional compartment are configured to engage for coupling the second additional compartment to the first additional compartment” is considered to be intended use. Examiner asserts that the recitation of intended use or purpose of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use or fulfilling said purpose, then it meets the claim. Herein, as a result of the duplication, the second additional compartment would have second interlocking member that is capable of being engaged with first interlocking member of the first additional compartment.
Regarding claim 4, Holbrook discloses, the main compartment is larger than the first additional compartment (See Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 6, Holbrook discloses, the first interlocking member and the second interlocking member engage through a snap-fit mechanism (Sullivan, Abstract; “The lower section (base) contains a closure member incorporated onto its top edge and designed to snap fit into upper section.”).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holbrook-Sullivan as applied to claim 1, in view of Healthy Houseplants (hereinafter “Healthy” ; NPL; YouTube).
Regarding claim 7, Holbrook as modified does not disclose, two ventilation holes are covered by mesh.
Healthy discloses the use of net to cover holes (Timestamp:4:31).
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 Holbrook to have holes are covered by mesh as taught by Healthy for the purpose of preventing large debris from falling out while also preventing pests from going inside the compartment.
The limitation “are strategically position to allow air flow within the first additional compartment” is considered to be functional language. The prior art of Holbrook as modified has all the structures required perform the claimed functional limitation. Hence, the prior art is inherently capable of performing the limitation. It is well settled that it is possible for functional language to define structure, but that where no distinguishing structure has been defined, the claim is not patentable and is fully met by the reference. See In re Swinehart, 169 USPQ 226. See also General Electric v. United States, 198 USPQ 73 which further reinforced the concept that functional language which defines no structure cannot distinguish over the prior art. 2173.05(g)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/05/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as the current rejection as constructed discloses all the amendments as presented in claim 1.
The subject matter of claim 7 is rejected in view of NPL healthy.
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 SANJIDUL ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7670. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 -5:00.
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 E. 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.
/SANJIDUL ISLAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
/CHUN HOI CHEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
1 See MPEP 2144.04(I)