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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 6, 8, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuckmann (DE 4201064, citations to translation provided by Applicant on 22 October 2025) in view of Wade (US 10542812).
Regarding claim 1, Schuckmann teaches a package comprising: a container (15) configured to hold a cartridge refill, wherein the cartridge refill is a pouch (K) that is configured to contain a useable material and the cartridge refill includes a lock and load mechanism (2) that is configured to interference or friction fit with the container; a replaceable cap (25) configured to fit the container; and an actuator mechanism (22 and 18) integral with the container, and configured to dispense the useable material, wherein the actuator mechanism includes: an elevator (18) and wherein the elevator is configured to compress the pouch against the lock and load mechanism (Fig. 9).
Schuckmann does not teach a slider connected to the elevator.
Wade teaches a slider (60) connected to an elevator (40).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Schuckmann such that the elevator is moved via a slider as taught by Wade instead of via threads, wherein doing so would merely be a matter of simple substitution of one known elevator moving means with another with predictable results.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Schuckmann and Wade teaches the package of claim 1, wherein the slider is a pair of sliders (Wade 60), each of the pair of sliders connected to one side of the elevator (Wade Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Schuckmann and Wade teaches the package of claim 5, the container comprising: a pair of access surfaces (Wade 24 and 26) configured to permit a user to move the pair of sliders.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Schuckmann and Wade teaches the package of claim 1, wherein the slider is configured to move along a slot (Wade 30) of the container to move the elevator and compress the pouch against the lock and load mechanism to dispense the useable material.
Regarding claim 11, Schuckmann teaches a method for providing a reusable package, the method comprising: providing a container (15) configured to hold a replaceable compressible cartridge (K), wherein the replaceable compressible cartridge is a pouch that is configured to contain contents and the replaceable compressible cartridge includes a lock and load mechanism (2) that is configured to interference or friction fit with the container; replaceably positioning the replaceable compressible cartridge in the container (¶0048); dispensing contents from the replaceable compressible cartridge by actuating an actuator mechanism (including 22 and 18) to compress the replaceable compressible cartridge, wherein the actuator mechanism is integral with the container and includes an elevator (18), the elevator being movable to compress the replaceable compressible cartridge (Fig. 9); removing the replaceable compressible cartridge after use of the contents; and positioning another replaceable compressible cartridge in the container (¶0048).
Schuckmann does not teach that the elevator is connected to a slider, the slider being configured to move the elevator to compress the replaceable compressible cartridge.
Wade teaches a slider (60) connected to an elevator (40).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Schuckmann such that the elevator is moved via a slider as taught by Wade instead of via threads, wherein doing so would merely be a matter of simple substitution of one known elevator moving means with another with predictable results.
Claim(s) 2-4 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuckmann and Wade as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Groffsky (US 11490708).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Schuckmann and Wade teaches the package of claim 1, but does not teach that the cartridge refill comprising: a cap that includes ridges configured to assist in positioning the cartridge refill in the container.
Groffsky teaches a cap (319) for a cartridge refill that includes ridges (316) configured to assist in positioning the cartridge refill in the container.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cartridge of Schuckmann to have a cap that includes ridges configured to assist in positioning the cartridge refill in the container as taught by Groffsky for the purpose of providing the cartridge with latching means and remove the need for ring 35 of Schuckmann.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Schuckmann, Wade, and Groffsky teaches the package of claim 2, wherein the cartridge refill is positionable on the elevator (Schuckmann, Fig. 8), and wherein the slider is positioned on a side surface of a housing of the container (Wade Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Schuckmann, Wade, and Groffsky teaches the package of claim 3, the housing comprising: an access surface (Wade 24) configured to permit a user to move the slider, the access surface including slots (Wade 30) configured to retain the slider in position once moved.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Schuckmann and Wade teaches the package of claim 1, but does not teach that the container includes a scalloped-like access area (Wade 24) that is configured to retain a position of the slider and the elevator when the slider and the elevator are moved along a slot of the container.
Claim(s) 7, 9, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuckmann and Wade as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Taberlet (US 2017/0113236).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Schuckmann and Wade teaches the package of claim 1, but does not teach that the pouch is an in-mold label based pouch.
Taberlet teaches an in-mold label based pouch (1, see ¶0042).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the pouch of Schuckmann an in-mold label based pouch as taught by Taberlet for the purpose of providing the useable material with protection from evaporation, adsorption, and/or absorption (Taberlet, ¶0040).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Schuckmann and Wade teaches the package of claim 1, the cartridge refill comprising: a housing (Schuckmann 2) that includes-the lock and load mechanism.
Schuckmann does note teach a film in-mold labeled to the housing to contain the useable material wherein the film forms the pouch.
Taberlet teaches a film in-mold labeled (¶0042) to a housing (4) to contain a useable material wherein the film forms a pouch.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cartridge of Schuckmann to include a film in-mold labeled to the housing to contain the useable material wherein the film forms the pouch as taught by Taberlet for the purpose of providing the useable material with protection from evaporation, adsorption, and/or absorption (Taberlet, ¶0040).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Schuckmann and Wade teaches the method of claim 11, but does not teach: forming the pouch by in-mold labeling a film with a replaceable compressible cartridge structure.
Taberlet teaches forming a pouch (1) by in-mold labeling (¶0042) a film (2, 20A, 20B) with a replaceable compressible cartridge structure.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Schuckmann to include forming the pouch by in-mold labeling a film with a replaceable compressible cartridge structure as taught by Taberlet for the purpose of providing the useable material with protection from evaporation, adsorption, and/or absorption (Taberlet, ¶0040).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Schuckmann, Wade, and Taberlet teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the positioning further comprises: locking the replaceable compressible cartridge to the container via an interference or friction fit to facilitate compression of the film (Schuckmann, via 35).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Schuckmann, Wade, and Taberlet teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the positioning further comprises: aligning the replaceable compressible cartridge to the container to facilitate compression of the film (a user must align the cartridge with the container in order to insert the cartridge into the container).
Claim(s) 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuckmann in view of Taberlet and Arwatz (US 9210985).
Regarding claim 15, Schuckmann teaches a package comprising: a container (15); a cartridge refill (K) comprising: a cap (2) configured to assist in positioning the cartridge refill in the container; a pouch configured to contain useable material; and a lock and load mechanism (rim of 2) configured to interference or friction fit with the container; a replaceable cap (25) configured to fit the container; and an actuator mechanism (22 and 19) configured to dispense the useable material contained in the pouch by compressing the pouch (Fig. 9).
Schuckmann does not teach that the pouch is an in-mold label based pouch or that the container is compressible to release the cartridge refill from the container once the useable material is dispensed.
Taberlet teaches an in-mold label based pouch (1, see ¶0042).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the pouch of Schuckmann an in-mold label based pouch as taught by Taberlet for the purpose of providing the useable material with protection from evaporation, adsorption, and/or absorption (Taberlet, ¶0040).
Arwatz teaches a container (101) that is compressible (at 1001) to release a cartridge (102) from the container once the useable material therein is dispensed.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Schuckmann such that the container is compressible to release the cartridge refill from the container once the useable material is dispensed as taught by Arwatz, wherein doing so would merely be a matter of simple substitution of one known cartridge retention means for another with predictable results.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Schuckmann, Taberlet, and Arwatz teaches the package of claim 15, the actuator mechanism comprising: a screw (Schuckmann 16); an elevator (Schuckmann 18) connected to the screw; and an actuator (Schuckmann 22) connected to the screw, wherein rotation of the actuator rotates the screw which moves the elevator to compress the in-mold label based pouch against the lock and load mechanism to dispense the useable material.
Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuckmann, Taberlet, and Arwatz as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Wade.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Schuckmann, Taberlet, and Arwatz teaches the package of claim 15, the actuator mechanism comprising: an elevator (Schuckmann 18), wherein the cartridge refill is positionable on the elevator (Schuckmann Fig. 8), and the elevator is configured to compress the in-mold label based pouch against the lock and load mechanism to dispense the useable material.
Schuckmann does not teach a slider connected to the elevator.
Wade teaches a slider (60) connected to an elevator (40).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Schuckmann such that the elevator is moved via a slider as taught by Wade instead of via threads, wherein doing so would merely be a matter of simple substitution of one known elevator moving means with another with predictable results.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Schuckmann, Taberlet, Arwatz, and Wade teaches the package of claim 16, the container comprising: an access surface (Wade 24) configured to permit a user to move the slider, the access surface including slots (Wade 30) configured to retain the slider in position once moved.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Schuckmann, Taberlet, and Arwatz teaches the package of claim 15, the container comprising: an elevator (Schuckmann 18), wherein the cartridge refill is positionable on the elevator; the elevator configured to compress the in-mold label based pouch against the lock and load mechanism to dispense the useable material (Fig. 9).
Schuckmann does not teach a pair of sliders, each slider connected to one side of the elevator.
Wade teaches a pair of sliders (60) connected to an elevator (40), each slider connected to one side of the elevator.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Schuckmann such that the elevator is moved via a pair of sliders as taught by Wade instead of via threads, wherein doing so would merely be a matter of simple substitution of one known elevator moving means with another with predictable results.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Schuckmann, Taberlet, Arwatz, and Wade teaches the package of claim 18, the container comprising: a pair of access surfaces (Wade 24) configured to permit a user to move the pair of sliders.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 23 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments against the Chen reference are moot because the Chen reference is not relied upon in the new ground of rejection.
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 BRADLEY S OLIVER whose telephone number is (571)270-3787. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7-3 ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571)270-3735. 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.
/BRADLEY S OLIVER/Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/DAVID P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754