DETAILED ACTION
Product by Process
Please note, claim 13 includes product by process language. The below arguments establish a rationale tending to show the claimed product is the same as what is taught by the prior art. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. Once the Examiner provides a rationale tending to show that the claimed product appears to be the same or similar to that of the prior art, although produced by a different process, the burden shifts to applicant to come forward with evidence establishing an unobvious different between the claimed product and the prior art product.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martini (US 20170327276 A1) in view of Winberg (US 20190359370 A1).
Claim 1, Martini discloses the opening device (FIG 1-5) comprises a contact portion (1) and a closing element (25) detachably and/or rupturably attached to the contact portion (at 16) and configured to close and/or cover the designated pour opening; wherein the closing element (25) comprises:
- a main wall (15) detachably and/or rupturably attached to the contact portion
(at 16); and
- a pulling device (37) connected to the main wall (15) and configured to allow for the exertion of a separation force on the main wall (15) so as to detach the closing element (25) from the contact portion (see Figs. 1, 4); wherein the pulling device (37) comprises: - one or more leg elements (38) connected to and transversally extending from the main wall (15) (see Figs. 1, 4); and
- a coupling structure (37) connected to the plurality of leg elements (38); wherein each leg element (38) comprises:
- an elongated pillar (38) extending along a longitudinal axis (B), having a first end (bottom end at wall 15) and a second end (top end at ring 37), and being connected to the main wall at the first end and to the coupling structure at the second end (see Figs. 1, 4); and
- a connection portion of the pillar (lower part of pillar 38 connecting to wall 15); wherein each connection portion comprises the respective first end (bottom end of pillar 38) and has a first extension (any length from the bottom end of pillar 38 up to a section/position along the pillar 38 towards ring 37) along the respective longitudinal axis (B) that equals or is less than half of a second extension (total length of pillar 38 from wall 15 up to ring 37) along the respective longitudinal axis (B) of the respective pillar (38) from the first end to the second end.
But is silent on at least one stiffening rib.
Winberg teaches at least one stiffening rib (23).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Martini with stiffening rib as taught by Winberg in order to provide improved stiffness and reliability.
Claim 2, the modified apparatus of Martini teaches wherein each leg element comprises two stiffening ribs (Winberg: 23) spaced apart from one another and connected to the respective connection portion.
Claim 3, the modified apparatus of Martini teaches wherein each stiffening rib (Winberg: 23) is connected to a respective lateral section of the respective connection portion.
Claim 4, the modified apparatus of Martini teaches wherein each stiffening rib (Winberg: 23) is integrally connected to the main wall.
Claim 5, the modified apparatus of Martini discloses the claimed invention except for concave shape. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to, absent a showing of criticality, change the shape to concave to provide better support, since it has been held that the configuration was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration claimed was significant. MPEP 2144.05
Claim 6, the modified apparatus of Martini discloses the claimed invention except for trapezoidal like cross section. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to, absent a showing of criticality, change the shape to trapezoidal cross section to provide better support, since it has been held that the configuration was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration claimed was significant. MPEP 2144.05
Claim 7, the modified apparatus of Martini discloses the claimed invention except for relative size of the first base to the second base and relative size of the first base of first cross section to first base of second cross section. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to, absent a showing of criticality, change the size to provide better support, 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. MPEP 2144.05
. Claim 8, Martini discloses wherein the coupling structure (37) comprises a coupling ring (37) integrally connected to the respective second ends of the plurality of leg elements (38).
Claim 9, Martini discloses wherein the coupling ring comprises a plurality of main portions (widened portion of 37 connecting to 38; FIG 4), each one connected to one respective pillar, and a plurality of auxiliary portions (37 between 38), each one interposed between two respective main portions.
Claim 10, Martini discloses wherein one or more auxiliary portions are deformable ([0012] to [0013]).
Claim 11, Martini discloses whereon at least one auxiliary portion comprises a recess and/or a recessed surface (spacing between 38; FIG 4).
Claim 12, Martini discloses - a base frame (20) coupling and/or configured to couple the opening device (1) about the designated pour opening;
- a collar (14) extending from the base frame and defining and/or delimiting a flow channel (FIG 1) and having a pouring outlet (FIG 4); and
- a closure (25) coupled to the collar and configured to selectively open and close the pouring outlet;
wherein the base frame or the collar comprises the contact portion;
wherein the coupling structure (37) and the closure (25) are connected to one another (FIG 3).
Claim 13, Martini discloses mold configured to allow for molding the opening device onto a main body of a package for a pourable product and/or onto a precursor of a package for a pourable product ([0012] to [0013]).
Claim 14, Martini discloses at least one opening device (FIG 1-5)
Claim 15, Martini wherein the package (100) comprises a main body having a designated pour opening and being formed from a multilayer composite packaging material (3; [0038]), wherein the opening device is coupled onto the main body and about the designated pour opening (FIG 1).
Claim 16, Martini discloses wherein the opening device is molded to a main body of the package and/or onto a precursor of the package ([0012] to [0013], [0038] to [0042]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY W CARROLL whose telephone number is (571)272-4988. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 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, Paul Durand can be reached at (571) 272-4459. 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.
JEREMY W. CARROLL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3754
/Jeremy Carroll/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights