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 Group II (claims 5-11) in the reply filed on 5/26/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the applicant wishes claim 1 remains eligible for rejoinder at a later date. This is not found persuasive because the applicant has not pointed an error in the restriction.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Accordingly, claims 1-4 and 12-14 have been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 5-11 are objected to because of the following informalities: it is recommended that the applicant remove item numbers from the claim language. For example, "A multipack (1) comprising" should read "A multipack.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “a flat packaging blank” in claim 1renders the claim indefinite. What is considered "flat" about the packaging? The claims are directed towards an erected packaging..
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 5-6 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Garcia (ES 2159235 A1).
With respect to claim 5, Garcia discloses a multipack comprising: - multiple drink containers (4), - a flat packaging blank (1) with multiple openings in which the drink containers (4) are inserted and are held next to one another, and wherein the flat packaging blank (1) forms a cover (6) for each drink container (4), which covers at least regions of an upper side of the drink container (4), wherein the flat packaging blank (1) comprises at least one bridge (61) for each cover (6) that connects a cover (6) to a remaining portion (rest of 1) of the flat packaging blank (1) and has an inclined orientation relative to an upper broad side surface (side portion of 1 seen in figure 4) of the remaining portion (rest of 1).
Examiner Note: Each of the previous parenthesis items have been replaced with the respective item numbers correspondence on Garcia’s invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
580
362
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
628
430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 6, Garcia discloses multipack of claim 5, wherein each cover (6) is connected to a remaining portion (remainder of 1) of the flat packaging blank (1) with at least two bridges (8) wherein each of the at least two bridges (8) have an inclined orientation relative to an upper broad side surface ((side portion of 1 seen in figure 4) of the remaining portion (rest of 1).
With respect to claim 10, Garcia discloses multipack of claim 5, wherein the flat packaging blank (1) is formed of cellulose-containing material. (page 2, first paragraph under “Description of Invention”, see translation attached)
With respect to claim 11, Garcia discloses multipack of claim 5, wherein the at least one bridge (61) forms a profile having at least one curve. (from figure 2 it is clear that there are curved corners)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garcia (ES 2159235 A1) in view of Miret (WO 9525679 A1).
With respect to claim 7, Garcia discloses the multipack of claim 6, wherein each cover (6) is connected to a remaining portion (remainder of 1) of the flat packaging blank (1) with bridges (61) wherein each of the bridges (61) each have an inclined orientation relative to an upper broad side surface (other flat portion of 1) of the remaining portion (1 not including 6) .
Garcia failed to disclose of exactly three bridges and the bridges are offset from one another by at least approximately 120° along the peripheral profile of the particular cover. However in a similar field of endeavor, namely article carriers, Miret taught of an article carrier with exactly three bridges which they found effective for securing three part circular sections the bridges being approximately 120 degrees for the central ones. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of article carriers before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include exactly three bridges as taught by Miret in the carrier of Garcia since the claimed invention is only a combination of these old and well known elements which would have performed the same function in combination as each did separately. In the present case Garcia teaches of bridges and adding exactly three spaced 120° as taught by Miret would maintain the same functionality of Gracia, making the results predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143).
Examiner Note: Alternatively, a change in shape rationale can also apply here. Limiting the bridges to three spaced 120° apart would be considered as a change of shape of Grooms design and not novel in view of the guidelines established In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). The application has presented no argument which shows that the particular configuration of their bridges for the connecting the cover is significant or is anything more than one of numerous configurations a person of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the purpose of connecting the cover to the packaging blank from Garcias invention. See Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459.
With respect to claim 8, the references as applied to claim 7, above, disclose all the limitations of the claims. Garcia further discloses wherein multiple retaining tabs (5 of Garcia) are formed between two adjacent bridges (61 of Garcia) of a particular cover (6 of Garcia), wherein the multiple retaining tabs (5 of Garcia) are engaged with a particular drink container (4 of Garcia) of a particular cover (6 of Garcia).
With respect to claim 9, the references as applied to claim 8, above, disclose all the limitations of the claims. Garcia further discloses wherein the drink containers (4 of Garcia) are beverage cans (cans are shown if figure 6 of Garcia) and wherein: a) a particular cover (6 of Garcia) at least approximately completely covers an upper side of a beverage can (4 of Garcia), or wherein: b) the multiple retaining tabs (5 of Garcia) engage a beverage can (4 of Garcia) from below in the region of a flanged rim.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US-20250042634-A1 OR US-20230134359-A1 OR US-20100264043-A1 OR US-20040211695-A1 OR US-20220009686-A1 OR US-20040206639-A1 OR US-20110000799-A1 US-11390405-B2 OR US-5503267-A OR US-5318178-A OR US-5230425-A
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYMREN K SANGHERA whose telephone number is (571)272-5305. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri.
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 on (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.
/S.K.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
