Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/627,173

Modified Snack Containment and Dispensing Apparatus

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 04, 2024
Examiner
OJOFEITIMI, AYODEJI T
Art Unit
3651
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Tomo Technologies, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 12m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
397 granted / 528 resolved
+23.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 12m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
566
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
48.7%
+8.7% vs TC avg
§102
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 528 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. Claims 1-3,5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benaroya (US 4,572,403) in view of Hines et al. (US 2016/0008226) in view of Lambelet et al. (US 5,664,697). Claim 1, Benaroya discloses a snack containment and dispensing apparatus comprising: a bowl (12); a lid (13) connectable with the bowl, the lid (13) including an opening (21) having a pivotable cover (41b); said pivotable cover (41b) having a vertical handle (43) connected at one end of a window (41) disposed within said lid (13); a tray (15) disposed with the bowl (12), the tray (15) including multiple pockets (17) and being configured for selective rotation relative to the bowl (12) and connected lid (13) to align one or more of the pockets (17) with the pivotable cover (41) of said lid (13). Benaroya does not disclose an opening having a slidable cover; said slidable cover having a vertical handle connected at one end of a window disposed within said lid where said slidable cover holds in multiple open positions; and a plunger button configured to actuate rotation of the tray. Hines discloses an opening (22) having a slidable cover (24); said slidable cover (24) within said lid (12) where said slidable cover holds in multiple open positions (see abstract; para.0001-0045). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Benaroya with an opening having a slidable cover; said slidable cover having a vertical handle connected at one end of a window disposed within said lid where said slidable cover holds in multiple open positions simply to have a medication dispenser with a more advanced electronic core that enables a sliding cover to rotate automatically to open more than one window in the lid. Lambelet discloses a plunger button (30) configured to actuate rotation of the tray (29). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Benaroya with a plunger button configured to actuate rotation of the tray since it merely provides another well-known mechanism in the art for rotation of the tray and such configuration does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation. Claim 2, Benaroya discloses where the lid (13) is connectable with the bowl (12) by an angled rim on the interior circumference of the lid (fig.3) and an angled rim on the interior circumference of the bowl. Claim 3, Benaroya discloses where said angled rim on the lid (13) and said angled rim on the bowl (12) are formed at such angles so as to enable a locking, sealed connection between the lid and the bowl (see figures). Claim 5, Benaroya discloses where the locking of the angled rim of the lid (13) and the angled rim of the bowl (12) forms a seal through a pressure closure. Claim 6, Benaroya does not disclose where the multiple pockets are of various volumetric sizes. Hines discloses where the multiple pockets are of various volumetric sizes (para.0037). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Benaroya with where the multiple pockets are of various volumetric sizes simply to enable storing different-sized articles to be dispensed inside the device. Claim 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benaroya (US 4,572,403) in view of Hines et al. (US 2016/0008226) in view of Lambelet et al. (US 5,664,697) in view of Sellars et al. (US 2008/0083772). Claim 4, Benaroya in view of Hines in view of Lambelet do not disclose where the mated rims are composed of multiple materials, each material having a unique elasticity. Sellars discloses where the mated rims (para.0051; rims of lid and body portions are made of different materials which means they inherently have differing and unique elasticity) are composed of multiple materials, each material having a unique elasticity (para.0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Benaroya in view of Hines in view of Lambelet with where the mated rims are composed of multiple materials, each material having a unique elasticity because having a lid and body portion made of different materials is notoriously well-known in the art. Claims 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benaroya (US 4,572,403) in view of Hines et al. (US 2016/0008226) in view of DeJonge (US 6,098,835). Claim 1, Benaroya discloses a snack containment and dispensing apparatus comprising: a bowl (12); a lid (13) connectable with the bowl, the lid (13) including an opening (21) having a pivotable cover (41b); said pivotable cover (41b) having a vertical handle (43) connected at one end of a window (41) disposed within said lid (13); a tray (15) disposed with the bowl (12), the tray (15) including multiple pockets (17) and being configured for selective rotation relative to the bowl (12) and connected lid (13) to align one or more of the pockets (17) with the pivotable cover (41) of said lid (13). Benaroya does not disclose an opening having a slidable cover; said slidable cover having a vertical handle connected at one end of a window disposed within said lid where said slidable cover holds in multiple open positions; and a plunger button configured to actuate rotation of the tray. Hines discloses an opening (22) having a slidable cover (24); said slidable cover (24) within said lid (12) where said slidable cover holds in multiple open positions (see abstract; para.0001-0045). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Benaroya with an opening having a slidable cover; said slidable cover having a vertical handle connected at one end of a window disposed within said lid where said slidable cover holds in multiple open positions simply to have a medication dispenser with a more advanced electronic core that enables a sliding cover to rotate automatically to open more than one window in the lid. DeJonge discloses a plunger button (17) configured to actuate rotation of the tray (23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Benaroya with a plunger button configured to actuate rotation of the tray since it merely provides another well-known mechanism in the art for rotation of the tray and such configuration does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation. Claims 7-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hines et al. (US 2016/0008226) in view of Conley et al. (US 2008/0203107). Claim 7, Hines discloses a snack containment and dispensing apparatus comprising a bowl (14); a tray (18) having a plurality of containment compartments (44); a lid (12) connectable with the bowl (14), the lid including an opening (22) having a slidable cover (24); said tray (18) indexes such that exposed access of a containment compartment (44) is changed from a first containment compartment position to a second containment compartment position; where when said tray is indexed said second containment compartment position is directly beneath said slidable cover (24) in the lid (12; para.0001-0045). Hines does not disclose a plunger device adapted such that when said plunger is depressed, said tray indexes. Conley discloses a plunger device (208A) adapted such that when said plunger is depressed, said tray (202) indexes (para.0085). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Hines with a plunger device adapted such that when said plunger is depressed, said tray indexes because it is just another tray rotating mechanism that incrementally rotates the tray and such limitation does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation. Claim 8, Hines discloses where the first containment compartment (fig.2a) position permits access to one or more containment compartments. Claim 9, Hines discloses where the second containment compartment (fig.2a) position permits access to one or more containment compartments. 10. The snack containment and dispensing apparatus of Claim 8, where the rims of each of the lid and of the bowl are disposed to form a locking seal when the rim of said lid and the rim of said bowl are compressed together. Claim 10, Hines discloses where the rims of each of the lid (12) and of the bowl (14) are disposed to form a locking seal when the rim of said lid and the rim of said bowl are compressed together (fig.1). Claim 11, Hines discloses where the containment compartments are of various volumetric sizes (para.0037). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AYODEJI T OJOFEITIMI whose telephone number is (571)272-6557. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, GENE CRAWFORD can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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. /AYODEJI T OJOFEITIMI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3651 /GENE O CRAWFORD/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599272
MULTI-FUNCTION PAPER TOWEL HOLDER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602964
ITEM TAKE-OUT APPARATUS AND ITEM TAKE-OUT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599271
HYGIENIC AND CONTROLLED FABRIC WEB DISPENSING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595114
CAP ASSEMBLY FOR A MEDICATION CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589952
VACUUM LIFTING TUBE ARRANGEMENT HAVING EXTENSION-LOCKABLE LIFTING TUBE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+13.5%)
1y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 528 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month