DETAILED ACTION
The current application is a continuation of 18/735,089 filed on 06/05/2024 This communication is in response to the claim set filed by the applicant on 06/06/2024 that includes claims 1-18 as pending. Therefore, claims 1-18 are examined on the merits.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a spring” in line 12 of claim 9 and “a spring” in line 9 of claim 12 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the two arms” in lines 6, 7, and 9. Claim 1 recites “two parallel arms” and not “two arms” in line 5. A claim should keep the same terminology after introducing a limitation and should refer to it with “said or the” preceding the limitation. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites “two arms” in line 6. Claim 2 depends from claim 1 which only recites “two parallel arms”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites “a tip of each arm” in line 3 and “two arm tips” in lines 7 and 8. This leads to ambiguity and applicant is advised to keep the terminology same throughout the body of the claim when referring to a limitation. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the lid" in line 4 and “two arms” in line 9. Claim 6 depends from claim 1 which recites “a dispensing lid” and “two parallel arms and not “a lid” “two arms”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the lid" in line 3 and “the arms” in line 2. Claim 7 depends from claim 6 which depends from claim 1 which recites “a dispensing lid” and “two parallel arms” and not “a lid” and “the arms”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 8 recites “the arm tips” in line 3. Claim 8 depends from claim 6, which depends from claim 1. Neither claim 6 nor claim 1 recite “arm tips”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the lid" in lines 7 and 9, “the fastener lever” in lines 12, 13, and 18, “the fastener button” in lines 12, 14, and 17, “the fastener spring” in lines 13 and 18. Claim 9 depends from claim 2 which depends from claim 1 which recites “a dispensing lid” and not “a lid”. Furthermore, claim 9 recites, in lines 11-12, that “the fastener formed of the continuous material in common and having a button, a lever, and a spring”. When referring back to these limitations, the applicant should “the button”, “the spring”, and “the lever”. For all of these reasons, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the lid" in lines 4 and 7. Claim 10 depends from claim 9, which depends from claim 2, which depends from claim 1 which recites “a dispensing lid” and not “a lid”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the lid" in line 7. Claim 11 depends from claim 1 which recites “a dispensing lid” and not “a lid”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the lid" in line 7, “the fastener lever” in lines 9, 10, and 23, “the fastener button” in lines 11 and 22, and “the fastener spring” in lines 10 and 23. Claim 12 depends from claim 1 which recites “a dispensing lid” and not “a lid”. Furthermore, claim 12 recites, in lines 8-9, that “the fastener formed of the continuous material in common and having a button, a lever, and a spring”. When referring back to these limitations, the applicant should “the button”, “the spring”, and “the lever”. For all of these reasons, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the lid" in line 5, “two arms” in lines 9, 11, 12, 18, and 23. Claim 13 recites “a dispensing lid” and “two parallel arms” and not “a lid” and “two arms”. A claim should keep the same terminology after introducing a limitation and should refer to it with “said or the” preceding the limitation. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 16 recites “a tip of each arm” in line 3 and “two arm tips” in lines 7 and 8. This leads to ambiguity and applicant is advised to keep the terminology same throughout the body of the claim when referring to a limitation. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the lid" in line 5. Claim 17 depends from claim 13 which recites “a dispensing lid” and not “a lid”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites “the arm tips” in line 3. Claim 18 depends from claim 13, which does not recite “arm tips”. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claims 3, 4, 14, and 15 are also rejected under the same grounds for being dependent on claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Samartgis (US PN 2014/0217128).
Regarding claim 1, Samartgis discloses a dispensing lid (item 1, figure 1) for use with a container, the dispensing lid comprising:
a body (items 2, 20, figure 1); and
a selectively extendable and retractable carrying mechanism (the handle 10 can be retracted back and extended forward, figures 5-9) including:
a handle (items 11, 12, figure 3) having:
two parallel arms (parallel arms of handle 11, figure 3);
a bridge (top U section connecting arms of handle 11, figure 3) connecting the two arms near a first end of each arm; and two posts (item 16, figure 3), each projecting from a respective one of the two arms near a second end of its respective arm;
two arm tracks (item 23, figure 3) formed into the body and through which the two arms respectively slide when extending and retracting the handle; and
two post channels (items 25, 27, figure 5) inside the two arm tracks and through which the two posts respectively slide when extending and retracting the handle (paragraphs [0024], [0026], [0028], [0030]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable, if the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections are overcome, if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13-18 are allowed over the prior arts allowed, if the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections are overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following documents disclose subject matter related to
dispensing lid assemblies with a spout, a rotating cap, a handle, an actuator mechanism: US PN 5,203,468, US PN 6,109,487, US PN 6,382,476, US PG PUB 2004/0217139, US PG PUB 2012/0031902, US PG PUB 2012/0187075, US PG PUB 2012/0305559, US PG PUB 2012/0312832, US PN 9,380,898, US PG PUB 2017/0238744, US PN 10,124,937, US PN 10,512,347, US PG PUB 2020/0071038, US PG PUB 2022/0212843, US PN 11,390,432, and US PN 11,396,407.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL J PANCHOLI whose telephone number is (571)272-9324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (9 am - 7 pm).
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.
/Vishal Pancholi/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754