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 .
This action is written in response to the amendment filed 05/11/2026
Claims 11, 13-20 and 23-33 are presented for examination
This action is Final
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.
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) 20, 23-25 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berstein (US 5,526,925) in view of Weaver (US 3,874,502).
Claim 20. Bernstein discloses an article carrier 10 for packaging at least one article, the article carrier comprising at least one primary panel 22 forming a handle structure 32, the at least one primary panel comprising a handle portion and at least one article retention structure 24 for engaging an article so as to provide a top gripping article carrier (fig. 2);
the at least one article retention structure comprising a receiving opening having a boundary including a first edge (parallel to 28) and second opposing edge (perpendicular to 26), wherein the second edge is defined by a series of distal ends of engaging teeth providing engaging edges thereof (fig. 2).
Bernstein fails to disclose multiple edge portions that have determined center of curvature distances. Weaver teaches an article carrier wherein the first edge E1 is arranged to be closer to the handle portion 15 than the second edge E2, the first edge is curved such that the centre of curvature @20 of the first edge is located closer to the second edge than to the first edge (fig. 2-3).
PNG
media_image1.png
201
237
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the openings of Bernstein to include the curvature configuration of Weaver to assist in both accommodating a product while also allowing easy stretching for removal of the product (Weaver; col. 1, ll. 56-64).
Claim 23. Bernstein-Weaver discloses the article carrier according to claim 20, wherein the boundary further includes a pair of third and fourth opposing edges which continuously connect the first and second edges such that each of the third and fourth edges provides a smooth transition between the first and second edges (Weaver; see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
201
237
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 24. Bernstein-Weaver discloses the article carrier according to claim 20, wherein the radius of curvature of the first edge is less than the radius of curvature of the second edge (Weaver; col. 3, ll. 28-50).
Claim 25. Bernstein-Weaver discloses the article carrier according to claim 20, wherein the article carrier comprises a release device, the release device comprises a pull tab (Weaver; claim 4).
Claim 32. Bernstein-Weaver discloses the blank for forming the article carrier of claim 20 (Bernstein; abstract).
Claim(s) 26-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berstein (US 5,526,925) in view of Weaver (US 3,874,502) in view of Appleton (US 5,609,247).
Claims 26-27. Bernstein-Weaver discloses the article carrier according to claim 25 but fails to disclose a cut on the article carrier. Appleton teaches wherein the release device comprises a cut 72 disposed between the pull tab 60, and the receiving opening of the at least one article retention structure (fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify panel of Bernstein-Weaver to include the release device of Appleton to assist in releasing the can bodies from the holder.
It is noted that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the linear cut to an arcuate cut, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) MPEP 214.04 IV B
Claims 28-29. Bernstein-Weaver discloses the article carrier according to claim 20 but fails to disclose a cut on the article carrier. Appleton teaches wherein the article carrier comprises a relief device, the relief device includes a relief cut 72, the relief cut is disposed between the handle portion and the receiving opening of the at least one article retention structure (fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify panel of Bernstein-Weaver to include the release device of Appleton to assist in releasing the can bodies from the holder.
It is noted that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the linear cut to an arcuate cut, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) MPEP 214.04 IV B
Claim 30. Bernstein-Weaver-Appleton discloses the article carrier according to claim 28, wherein the relief cut is disposed on an inner side of the receiving opening, the inner side of the receiving opening opposes the outer side (Appleton; fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 13-19, 31 and 33 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 20: In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Bernstein teaches the bottle carrier having the ability to be constructed from paperboard or other resilient, stiff and bendable sheet material (col. 1, 5-20). With these functional material characteristics, modifying the paperboard material with the plastic material found in Weaver would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. Such a modification would assist in snugly maintaining the position of the bottles in the carrier while also allowing for manipulation of the carrier to remove the bottles.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 RAVEN COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-1672. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm 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.
/RAVEN COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights