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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fron et al. (US 10077130 B1; hereinafter Fron).
Regarding claims 1 and 3, Fron discloses a corrugated container with integrated top handle and blank for making comprising a bottom wall (formed by 120/122/124/126); a plurality of side walls (112/114/116/118), connected to the bottom wall (see Fig. 7); a top wall (128/130/132/134), connected to the side walls wherein the top wall includes a first top wall panel (128), a second top-wall panel (130), and a third top-wall panel (134); a locking feature (see Figures 9-10) that couples the first top-wall panel and the second top- wall panel to the third top-wall panel in a closed configuration and a handle (136/138), connected to the top wall and movable relative to the top wall between a retracted configuration (see Fig. 7) and a deployed configuration (see Fig. 6), wherein at least a portion of the top wall forms a planar surface (128); in the retracted configuration, the handle is in a coplanar relationship with the planar surface (see Fig. 7); and in the deployed configuration, the handle is in a non-coplanar relationship with the planar surface (see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 11, Fron discloses a container further comprising at least one opening (141) formed in at least one of the side walls (Examiner considers opening 141 to be at least partially located in an upper portion of side wall 112).
Claim(s) 1-9, 11, 19-21, and 23-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cardoze et al. (US 10974865 B2; hereinafter Cardoze).
Regarding claims 1, 3, 19-20, and 23, Cardoze discloses a container with foldable carrying handles and a blank for making comprising a bottom wall (formed by 811/812/813/814); a plurality of side walls (821/822/823/824), connected to the bottom wall (see Fig. 8); a top wall (831/832/833/834), connected to the side walls wherein the top wall includes a first top wall panel (832), a second top-wall panel (834), and a third top-wall panel (833); a locking feature (locking ears 142 into apertures 835 and 836) that couples the first top-wall panel and the second top- wall panel to the third top-wall panel in a closed configuration and a handle (144), connected to the top wall and movable relative to the top wall between a retracted configuration (see Fig. 3) and a deployed configuration (see Fig. 2), wherein at least a portion of the top wall forms a planar surface (see Fig. 3); in the retracted configuration, the handle is in a coplanar relationship with the planar surface (see Fig. 3); and in the deployed configuration, the handle is in a non-coplanar relationship with the planar surface (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claims 2, 8-9, 21, and 24, Cardoze discloses a container and blank for making wherein the second top-wall panel is opposite the first top-wall panel; the first top-wall panel and the second top-wall panel are movable relative to the side walls between an open configuration and a the closed configuration; and in the closed configuration, a portion of the first top-wall panel overlaps a portion of the second top-wall panel (see Fig. 1; Examiner notes that the portions of each top wall panel that defines the handle opening overlap each other).
Regarding claims 4-7 and 25, Cardoze discloses a container and blank for making wherein the top wall further comprises a fourth top-wall panel (831), opposite the third top-wall panel (833); the third top-wall panel and the fourth top-wall panel are movable relative to the side walls between the open configuration and the closed configuration; in the closed configuration, a portion of the first top-wall panel and a portion of the second top-wall panel overlap a portion of the third top-wall panel; and in the closed configuration, a portion of the first top-wall panel and a portion of the second top-wall panel overlap a portion of the fourth top-wall panel (see Figures 1-3 and 8).
Regarding claims 11 and 26, Cardoze discloses a container and blank for making further comprising at least one opening (835/836) formed in at least one of the side walls (Examiner considers openings 835 or 836 to be at least partially located in an upper portion of respective side walls 821 or 823).
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) 10 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cardoze in view of Fron.
Regarding claims 10 and 22, Cardoze discloses the claimed invention except for handles defined by perforated lines in the top wall panels. Fron teaches a corrugated container with an integrated top handle wherein a first handle is connected to a first top-wall panel along a first-handle first fold line (50/64), a first-handle second fold line, and a first-handle perforated line; a second handle is connected to a second top-wall panel along a second handle first fold line, a second-handle second fold line, and a second-handle perforated line; the first handle is separable from the first top-wall panel along the first-handle perforated line to move the first handle from the retracted configuration to the deployed configuration; and the second handle is separable from the second top wall panel along the second handle perforated line to move the second handle from the retracted configuration to the deployed configuration (Col 3 lines 15-45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to modify Cardoze’s container to have handles defined by at least one respective perforated line, as taught by Fron, in order to ensure that said handles maintain a planar configuration prior to deploying said handles into the second configuration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 8-11, filed 01/28/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 19 under USC 102(a)(1)—in view of Lee have been fully considered and are persuasive. Lee lacks the top wall locking arrangement, as now claimed. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of USC 102(a)(1)—Fron or Cardoze.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE whose telephone number is (571)270-1982. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday.
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, NATHAN J NEWHOUSE can be reached at (571)272-4544. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights