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 .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or (a)(2) as being anticipated by WO 2021084284 (Davis).
Regarding claim 1, Davis discloses A dispenser (2 figure 1) formed of card-based or paper-based material (See abstract, at line 4 “such as paperboard…”) for a product in stick form (52), the dispenser comprising: a dispenser axis (a figure 1) extending along a length of the dispenser; a proximal end; a distal end (each is apparent in figures 1-2 etc.); a product stick carrier in the form of a cylindrical tube for receiving a product stick in use (80); a sleeve in the form of a cylindrical tube (220 figure 13 for example), wherein the product stick carrier is located within the sleeve and wherein the product stick carrier and the sleeve are moveable axially relative to one another; (See figure 13, 14, and abstract: “cams to move…) wherein the product stick carrier comprises: a cylindrical wall having an inner surface and an outer surface (240, 250, etc); a carrier proximal end;a carrier distal end (figure 14), from which the product stick extends in use (Figure 12); and a plurality of tabs extending inwardly toward the dispenser axis from the inner surface of the product stick carrier (82 figure 4 shows plural tabs), wherein the plurality of tabs are configured to engage a product stick supported by the product stick carrier in use to assist in securing the product stick within the product stick carrier (See 82, page 23 discussing holding product).
Regarding claim 2. Davis discloses each of the plurality of tabs is attached to the inner surface of the product stick carrier along a respective axially extending fold line (the intersection is shown in figure 1- 2; a fold line includes the perimeter intersection shown).
Regarding claim 6. Davis discloses the plurality of tabs are located toward the distal end of the product stick carrier (as shown in the figures)
Regarding claim 7, the action claimed is shown and discussed in the above reference, as shown with respect to claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Davis discloses the sleeve is an outer sleeve, and further comprising a mechanism for extending the product stick carrier axially relative to the outer sleeve to expose a product stick received by the product stick carrier for use (shown in figure 2)
Regarding claim 9, Davis discloses a product stick support disc within the product stick carrier and located proximal to the tabs 9the ring the tabs are shown on, 82, etc. ) wherein the product stick support disc is free from openings extending therethrough (it appears solid as an annular feature)
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) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2021084284 (Davis) as set forth above, in view of GB 107,159.
Regarding claims 3-4 Davis does not disclose the use of trapezoid punched/ folded elements used in packaging to hold the lipstick product thereof. The device uses a stacked or castellated insert to hold and engage product rather than a punch. In the same art, it is known to provide for trapezoid punched folds for engaging product in tubes, as shown in GB’159 at a1 a2 x, which are folded out to form a platform, etc. as seen in figure 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the castellation of 82 with a folded component, since both are seen to be useful at stabilizing products in tubes, and therefore could have been selected at the time the application was filed for that known purpose.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-15, 18-23, 25 are allowed.
Regarding claims 11 and 18, the device of and method of a mandrel for punching card on the mandrel into engagement with a precursor tube such that each cutting piece cuts a respective one of the tabs in the wall of the cylindrical tube and folds the resulting tab inwardly to extend from the inner surface of the cylindrical tube as the cutting piece engages the wall of the cylindrical tube and moves into a respective one of the recesses in the outer surface of the mandrel is not known in the closest art known (see cited in 892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN M MICHALSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-6752. The examiner can normally be reached Typically M-F 6a-3:30p East Coast Time.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
SEAN M. MICHALSKI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3724
/SEAN M MICHALSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724