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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/08/2026 has been entered.
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) 1-4 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayes (US4579241A).
Regarding claim 1, Hayes a closure for a spout of a flexible thin-walled packaging, comprising (fig,1 and 2 below that shows the closure that is capable of attaching to a spout of a flexible thin-walled packaging):
- a cap comprising an annular cap wall having a central cap axis (fig.1-2 below show the cap with an annular wall with a central axis );
- a tamper evident seal comprising a tamper evident ring suitable for being applied to the spout, a tamper evident portion which is integral with the cap and a plurality of breakable bridge which that, when the tamper evident seal is unbroken, join the tamper evident ring to the tamper evident portion (see annotated fig.1-2 below for the temper evident seal with a temper evident ring capable of being applied to a spout and tamper evident portion which is integral with the cap and a breakable bridge 15 as seen in fig.8-9);
wherein the tamper evident ring comprises an upper ring face delimiting the tamper evident ring at a top, and consisting of a wavy sinusoidal surface comprising a plurality ring ridges and a corresponding plurality of ring depressions which follow each other circumferentially, wherein each ring depression has a bottom ring surface (see annotated fig.1-2 for the upper ring face and making the ring a wavy sinusoidal surface with ridges and depressions);
- wherein the tamper evident portion comprises a lower portion face which delimits it delimiting the tamper evident portion at a bottom, and consisting of a wavy sinusoidal surface comprising a plurality of portion ridges and a corresponding plurality of portion depressions which follow each other circumferentially, wherein each portion ridge has a portion ridge surface (see annotated fig.1-2 below for the temper evident portion comprising lower face portion that consists of ridges and depressions that follow each other and each ridge has a ridge surface);
wherein each of the ring ridges is contained in one of the respective portion depressions and each of the portion ridges is contained in one of the respective ring depressions (see annotated fig.1-2 below for the ridges being contained in the depressions and vice versa); and
wherein each breakable bridge extends between a corresponding bottom ring surface and portion ridge surface to join one of plurality of ring depressions and a corresponding one of the plurality of portion ridges (Fig.1-2 below and 8-9 that show shows the bridges 15 joint the surfaces).
Annotated fig.1-2 of Hayes
PNG
media_image1.png
519
1075
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes further teaches wherein the upper ring face and the lower portion face are complementary (annotated fig.1-2 above shows the two faces are compliments of the ring and the portion since they fit together).
Regarding claim 3, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes further teaches wherein the bottom surfaces ring surface and the portion ridge surface are curved surfaces (annotated fig.1-2 above show the ring surface and the ridge surface are curved on the edges).
Regarding claim 4, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes further teaches wherein the cap further comprises a cap flange, radially externally projecting, from the annular cap wall, and wherein the tamper evident portion protrudes from the cap flange (see annotated fig.4 below for the cap flange radially projecting from the cap wall and temper portion protrudes form the flange).
Annotated fig.4 of Hayes
PNG
media_image2.png
647
350
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes further teaches wherein the closure is made in a single piece of plastic material (“The present invention relates to a molded plastic closure cap having a cap top and skirt with container engaging means on the cap skirt where a lower portion of the skirt or band is visibly separated from the remaining portion of a cap skirt on cap removal or partial removal..” Col.1 lines 5-10).
Regarding claim 13, the references as applied to claim 4 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes further teaches wherein the tamper evident portion protrudes axially from the cap flange (see annotated fig.1-2 above and the tamper evident portion protrudes axially from the flange).
Regarding claim 14, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes further teaches wherein the tamper evident seal comprises a number of breakable bridges equal to the number of ring depressions (fig.1-2 and 8-9 shows the breakable bridges 15 will be equal to depressions).
Regarding claim 15, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes further teaches wherein the closure is made in a single piece by injection molding (“The present invention relates to a molded plastic closure cap having a cap top and skirt with container engaging means on the cap skirt where a lower portion of the skirt or band is visibly separated from the remaining portion of a cap skirt on cap removal or partial removal.”- Col.1 lines 5-10).
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) 5 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over references applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Van Der Molen (US20190144189A1).
Regarding claim 5, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes does not teach wherein said at least one breakable bridge is axially tapered, being thicker near an attachment to the bottom ring surface and thinner near the portion ridge surface.
Van Der Molen does teach wherein said at least one breakable bridge is axially tapered, being thicker near an attachment to the bottom ring surface and thinner near the portion ridge surface (fig.2C and 2D show the bridge 34 that are tapered and being thicker near the portion ridge and thinner near ring surface). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the breakable bridges disclosed by Hayes by adding the teaching of tapered bridges as disclosed by Van Der Molen in order to make the connection points at which the bridges break at a specific spot i.e. bridge would start to break when the cap is turned at the weakest or the thinnest part to have a controlled breaking.
Regarding claim 7, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes does not teach wherein the cap further comprises a drip-catcher device suitable for sealingly engaging the spout, so that a product contained in the flexible thin-walled packaging does not escape.
Van Del Molen does teach wherein the cap further comprises a drip-catcher device suitable for sealingly engaging the spout, so that a product contained in the flexible thin-walled packaging does not escape (see annotated fig.3D below for the cap having a drip catcher device that is capable of sealing the spout). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cap disclosed by Hayes by adding the drip catcher as disclosed by Van Del Molen in order to catch the excess liquid or contents that would flow when using the closure.
Annotated fig.3D of Van del Molen
PNG
media_image3.png
659
680
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, the references as applied to claim 7 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes as modified in claim 7 further teaches wherein the drip-catcher device comprises a drip-catcher ring which is integrated into a cap base inside the cap, so that, between the annular cap wall and the drip- catcher ring an annular housing is provided, suitable for accommodating a portion of the spout (see annotated fig.3D above).
Claim(s) 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over references applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Pritikin (US7591398B2).
Regarding claim 9, the references as applied to claim 1 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes does not teach a strap suitable for keeping the cap connected to the tamper evident ring even when the tamper evident seal is broken.
Pritikin does teach a strap suitable for keeping the cap connected to the tamper evident ring even when the tamper evident seal is broken (fig.1 shows the tether 20 that is connected to the ring 22 and will stay connected after the seal is broken). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cap disclosed by Hayes by adding the teaching of tether as disclosed by Pritikin in order to have the cap still be connected to rest of the closure for user convenient as it will make the closing of the container easier.
Regarding claim 10, the references as applied to claim 9 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes as modified in claim 9 further teaches wherein the strap extends from a region of an outer side surface of the tamper evident ring to a region of an outer side surface of the annular cap wall (fig.3 shows the tether 20extends from a region on the outer side surface of the ring 22 to the region on the outer surface of the annular cap wall ).
Regarding claim 11, the references as applied to claim 10 above discloses all the limitations substantially claimed. Hayes as modified in claim 10 further teaches wherein the strap comprises a first portion protruding from the tamper evident ring, a second portion protruding from the cap, and an arched connecting portion that connects the first portion and the second portion, and wherein the first portion and the second section are connected to the tamper evident ring and to the cap, respectively (see annotated fig.3 of Pritikin below for the two portions and arched portion that connected respectively as stated).
Annotated fig.3 of Pritikin
PNG
media_image4.png
692
793
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant did not argue any of the 103’s and the specifics of it and Van Del Molen is still used but as a secondary reference to teach other elements of the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRINCE PAL whose telephone number is (571)272-7525. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 9:30 AM - 7:30 PM (EST).
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.
/PRINCE PAL/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights