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 Species I (claims 1-20) in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no search burden to examine all the species. This is not found persuasive because applicant is only allowed one invention per application and applicant fails to argue that the species are not patentably distinct.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by US 2020/0377266 to Lotfi.
Regarding claim 1, Lotfi discloses a container (Fig 1) comprising a base (15) including a plurality of cells (13), wherein each cell is sized and shaped for receiving a food item therein (intended use), a land (12) positioned between adjacent cells, a lid (14) releasably engaged with the base (15) when the container is in a closed configuration, the lid including a cover and a retaining column (1) extending from the cover to a distal column end (9), wherein the distal column end (9) engages the land of the base when the container is in closed configuration (Fig 5), the retaining column (1) including outwardly extending retainers (4), wherein when the container is in closed configuration, each of the outwardly extending retainers (4) is located over one of the adjacent cells (13) to limit movement of the food item in the respective cell, each outwardly-extending retainer (4) is spaced a distance from the distal column end (9) such that a clearance is defined between the outwardly extending retainers (4) and plurality of cells (13) when the container is in closed configuration.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by US 2020/0062494 to Bergeron et al. (Bergeron).
Regarding claim 1, Bergeron discloses a container (Fig 1) comprising a base (30) including a plurality of cells (40), wherein each cell is sized and shaped for receiving a food item therein (intended use), a land (60) positioned between adjacent cells, a lid (20) releasably engaged with the base (30) when the container is in a closed configuration, the lid including a cover (21) and a retaining column (25) extending from the cover to a distal column end (25L), wherein the distal column end (25L) engages the land (60) of the base (30) when the container is in closed configuration, the retaining column (25) including outwardly extending retainers (15L), wherein when the container is in closed configuration (Fig 1), each of the outwardly extending retainers (15L) is located over one of the adjacent cells to limit movement of the food item in the respective cell, each outwardly-extending retainer (15L) is spaced a distance from the distal column end (25L) such that a clearance is defined between the outwardly extending retainers and plurality of cells when the container is in closed configuration (Fig 7).
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 9-12, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by US 2019/0352039 to Lane.
Regarding claim 1, Lane discloses a container (100) comprising a base (110) including a plurality of cells (118, 120, 122), wherein each cell is sized and shaped for receiving a food item therein (intended use), a land (142) positioned between adjacent cells, a lid (111) releasably engaged with the base (110) when the container is in a closed configuration, the lid including a cover (113) and a retaining column (143) extending from the cover to a distal column end (169), wherein the distal column end (169) engages the land of the base (110) when the container is in closed configuration, the retaining column (143) including outwardly extending retainers (165a-c), wherein when the container is in closed configuration, each of the outwardly extending retainers (165a-c) is located over one of the adjacent cells to limit movement of the food item in the respective cell, each outwardly-extending retainer (165a-c) is spaced a distance from the distal column end such that a clearance is defined between the outwardly extending retainers and plurality of cells when the container is in closed configuration (Fig 4).
Regarding claim 2, Lane further discloses recessed portions (145) of the retaining column (143) respectively extending between distal column end (169) and outwardly extending retainers (165), each retainer extends outwardly from recessed portion of the column at an oblique angle (Fig 9).
Regarding claim 3, Lane further discloses base including a base rim (124) and lid including a lid rim (125) that engages the base rim when container is closed, wherein the plurality of cells are defined in a base surface that is sunk relative to the base rim (124) a depth approximately equal to a height of the clearance measured between the base surface and retainers (Fig 4).
Regarding claim 5, Lane discloses container of claim 3 and further discloses base including a base sidewall (114) extending from the base rim to the base surface, wherein the lid includes a lid sidewall (115) joined to the lid rim by a lid transition section (135), the lid transition section including a first portion (137) extending downwardly from lid rim to lower point and second portion (127) extending inwardly from low point to lid sidewall, wherein first portion (137) of the lid transition section is overlapped by base sidewall (114) when container is in closed configuration.
Regarding claim 9, Lane discloses a container (100) comprising a base (110) including a base rim (124), a base surface (112) that is sunk relative to base rim (124), at least one cell (118) defined in the base surface, wherein the at least one cell is sized and shaped for receiving a food item therein, a lid (111) including a cover (113), a lid rim (125) that is releasably engaged with the base rim (124) when the container is in closed configuration, a sidewall (115) extending between the cover and lid rim, retainers (165) defined in the lid sidewall, the retainers extending inwardly from the lid sidewall at an oblique angle (Fig 9), wherein when the container is in closed configuration, the inwardly extending retainers are located above the at least one cell to limit movement of the at least one food item received therein and each retainer extends inwardly from the sidewall at the oblique angle to a height from the base surface such that a clearance is defined between the retainers and the cell (Fig 4, €0058).
Regarding claim 10, Lane further discloses base surface (112) sunk relative to base rim (124) a depth approximately equal to height of retainers (165) (Fig 4).
Regarding claim 11, Lane discloses container of claim 3 and further discloses base including a base sidewall (114) extending from the base rim to the base surface, wherein the lid includes a lid sidewall (115) joined to the lid rim by a lid transition section (135), the lid transition section including a first portion (137) extending downwardly from lid rim to lower point and second portion (127) extending inwardly from low point to lid sidewall, wherein first portion (137) of the lid transition section is overlapped by base sidewall (114) when container is in closed configuration.
Regarding claim 12, Lane further discloses lid sidewall including indents (A, Fig 9) that lengthen inward extend of second portion of the lid transition section to define the inwardly extending retainers (165), wherein second portion (127) of lid transition section extend from low point to lid sidewall at oblique angle (Fig 9).
Regarding claim 14, Lane further discloses base and lid including complementing snap features (164, 169) that engage one another outboard of base rim and lid rim when the container is in closed configuration (€0060).
Claim(s) 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by US 2013/0004625 to Brummer et al. (Brummer).
Regarding claim 15, Brummer discloses a container (100) including a base (102) including a plurality of cells (106), each cell is sized and shaped for receiving a food item, a land (at 222) positioned between adjacent cells, a lid (108) releasably engaged with the base when the container is closed, the lid (108) including a cover (112) and a retaining column (172) extending from the cover to distal column end (174), the distal column end (174) engages the land of the base when the container is closed, wherein the land includes an anti-shock element (222) configured to flex in response to a force exerted by the retaining column (€0148).
Regarding claim 16-18, Brummer further discloses anti-shock element is a flexible raised structure that includes an interior wall and exterior wall, interior wall defining an opening that receives a distal tip (220) of the retaining column (143) protruding from the distal column end, each of the interior and exterior wall including a flexure allow the element to flex (€0148).
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) 4, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lane in view of US 2021/0362921 to Krueger.
Regarding claim 4, 13, Lane discloses container of claim 3, 9 but does not teach s-shaped interlocks. However, Kruger discloses a container (Fig 1) and in particular discloses base and lid including complementing s-shaped interlocks that sealingly engage one another outboard the base rim (21) and lid rim (3) when container is in closed configuration (€0044). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate s-shaped interlock to Lane as suggested by Kruger in order to facilitate sealing of the container.
Claim(s) 1, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2013/0004625 to Brummer et al. (Brummer) in view of Lane.
Regarding claim 1, Brummer discloses a container (100) comprising a base (102) including a plurality of cells (106), wherein each cell is sized and shaped for receiving a food item therein (intended use), a land (at 222) positioned between adjacent cells, a lid (108) releasably engaged with the base (102) when the container is in a closed configuration, the lid including a cover (112) and a retaining column (172) extending from the cover to a distal column end (174), wherein the distal column end (174) engages the land of the base (102) when the container is in closed configuration. Brummer does not teach the retaining column including outwardly extending retainers as recited. However, Lane discloses a lid (Fig 9) comprising a retaining column, the retaining column (143) including outwardly extending retainers (165a-c), wherein when the container is in closed configuration, each of the outwardly extending retainers (165a-c) is located over one of the adjacent cells (118, 120, 122) to limit movement of the food item in the respective cell, each outwardly-extending retainer (165a-c) is spaced a distance from the distal column end such that a clearance is defined between the outwardly extending retainers and plurality of cells when the container is in closed configuration (Fig 4). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate outward retainers to the column of Brummer as suggested by Lane in order to hold the food item (Lane, €0058).
Regarding claim 6, Brummer further discloses the land including anti-shock element (222) that engages the distal column end (174) when container is in closed configuration, the anti-shock element configured to flex in reposne to a force exerted by retaining column (€0148)
Regarding claim 7, Brummer further discloses anti-shock element is a flexible raised structure that includes an interior wall and exterior wall, interior wall defining an opening that receives a distal tip (220) of the retaining column (143) protruding from the distal column end, each of the interior and exterior wall including a flexure allow the element to flex (€0148).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brummer in view of Lane and US 2011/0233099 to Pitt.
Regarding claim 8, the modified Brummer teaches the container of claim 7 but does not teach a series of ribs on the flexure. However, Pitt discloses shock packaging (Fig 1) and in particular discloses anti-shock element (14) comprising radiused and stepped ribs on interior and exterior walls (Fig 7). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate ribs to the Brummer anti-shock element as suggested by Pitt in order to facilitate flex.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brummer in view of Pitt.
Regarding claims 19-20, Brummer teaches the container of claim 17 but does not teach a series of ribs on the flexure. However, Pitt discloses shock packaging (Fig 1) and in particular discloses anti-shock element (14) comprising radiused and stepped ribs on interior and exterior walls (Fig 7). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to incorporate ribs to the Brummer anti-shock element as suggested by Pitt in order to facilitate flex.
Conclusion
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