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 .
Response to Amendment
The amended claims of 22 July 2024 are examined in this Action.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nini (U.S. Pub. 2022/0411252 in view of Sander, et al. (“Sander”) (U.S. Pat. 5,588,532).
Regarding claim 1, Nini discloses a liquid-dispensing tap arrangement (1) with an automatic opening having tamper preventing means, which includes: a body (4); an internal valve or membrane with elastic dome (5) contained in the body; a driving element (3) contained in and operatively coupled with the valve or membrane; a cap (2), which is stably constrained with the body forming a single indivisible component (Abstract) and operatively coupled with the driving element.
Nini further discloses driving projections (3.4) which cooperate with tamper-evident elements (2.1) such that movement of driving element opens the tap and simultaneously breaks connecting jumpers (2.2)
Nina does not disclose the tamper-preventing element being a ring which separates from the cap and thereafter locks to the body to prevent removal of the ring.
Sander teaches a push-pull liquid-dispensing closure having an annular tamper indicating
band (30) connected to top cap (25) by a plurality of frangible elements (29).
Band (30) has an inwardly extending flange (32) which engages outwardly extending
flange (34) on pour spout (20), whereby upward opening movement of top cap (25) breaks
frangible elements (29) while band (30) is retained on pour spout (20) (Figs. 1-3 and 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to replace Nini's lateral tamper-evident elements with the annular tamper-indicating band and retaining-flange arrangement of Sander so that the tamper element is separated from the cap during first opening while remaining retained on the dispensing structure. Nini itself identifies as an objective that the tamper-evident component remain bound to the tap after opening rather than becoming a separate piece, and further
seeks to accomplish this with minimal modification to the existing tap and production equipment. Sander teaches a known push-pull liquid-dispensing structure accomplishing that same result by retaining annular band behind flange after rupture of frangible elements.
The modification would therefore have predictably provided Nini with an alternative retained tamper-evident structure while preserving Nini's valve, driving element, body and automatic-opening operation.
Regarding claim 2, Nini teaches a vertical pull tap wherein the user applies an upward lifting force to the protruding flaps of driving element (3) to open the tap (Fig. 36).
Regarding claim 3, Sander teaches tamper-indicating band (30) connected to top cap (25) by a plurality of annularly spaced frangible connecting elements (29) (Figs. 1-3 and 6), corresponding to the claimed connecting strips.
Regarding claim 6, Nini expressly teaches that the dispensing tap is preferably adapted for use with bag-in-box containers (¶ [0001]).
Regarding claim 7, Nini expressly teaches use of its liquid-dispensing tap with a bag-in-box container (¶ [0001]). It would therefore have been obvious to provide a bag-in-box container with the tap of Nini as modified by Sander for the reasons set forth above.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nini and Sander as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Grussen (U.S. Pat. 4,394,918).
Regarding claim 4, Neither Nini nor Sander expressly teaches the tamper-preventing ring having an inner diameter larger than the cap.
Grussen teaches tamper-proof hold ring (2) integrally formed with cap body (1) and connected thereto by breakable attachment tabs (4), wherein the ring has an inside diameter slightly greater than the outside diameter of cap body (col. 3; Figs. 1 and 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the tamper-preventing ring of the modified Nini tap with an inner diameter greater than the cap as taught by Grussen to facilitate molding and removal of the cap and ring from the mold without interference. (col. 2, lines 18-26)
Grussen expressly teaches that the enlarged ring diameter avoids the undercut/interference problem associated with conventional tamper rings and permits manufacture at high speed using a simple mold. Such modification is further consistent with Nini's stated objective of modifying its existing tap without substantially changing existing production equipment, thereby saving production time and cost.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nini and Sander as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Druitt (WO 00/64774).
Regarding claim 5, Sander teaches inward flange (32) on tamper band (30) engaging outward flange (34) on pour spout (20), but does not expressly teach the inward locking structure as at least two circumferential protrusions.
Druitt teaches tamper-evident band (63) having a plurality of equally spaced inwardly extending rib segments (66) which engage beneath outwardly extending retaining flange (39) of dispensing spout (33). When the top cap is moved toward its open position, rib segments (66) are held beneath flange (39), causing frangible bridges (64) to break (pg. 23, lines 13-16).
Druitt expressly teaches that the segmented ribs ride over retaining flange during assembly without damaging frangible bridges while thereafter engaging beneath flange to cause the bridges to break upon opening.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute Druitt's plurality of circumferentially spaced inward rib segments for the continuous inward flange of Sander, since doing so would would have predictably facilitated assembly of the retained tamper ring while preserving its locking and tamper-indicating function. (see MPEP 2143 I B).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J MELARAGNO whose telephone number is (571)270-7735. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri: 8 am - 5 pm +/- flex.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at (571) 272-4459. 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.
/MICHAEL J. MELARAGNO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3754
