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 § 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.
Claim 13 is 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. In claim 13, the phrase “the channel” lacks proper antecedent basis.
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) 1-8 and 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker (2014/0174602) in view of Vetten et al. (2015/0259109; hereinafter Vetten) and/or Wakabayashi et al. (5,105,997; hereinafter Wakabayashi).
As to claim 1, Baker discloses a liquid transport spout (10) comprising a backstop (see Fig. 6 below) having a slanted outward facing side, an apex (see Fig. 6 below) of the backstop is coupled to a hollow fill neck (12) and a base of the backstop is coupled to a hollow tube-fitting end (see Fig. 6 below). Baker further discloses the backstop contains an interior liquid transport channel bridging the fill neck and tube-fitting end (Fig. 6). Baker also discloses the other claimed limitations except for the backstop comprises a pyramid-shaped backstop having at least 3 outward facing sides as claimed. Vetten teaches a liquid transport spout (Figs. 1-2 & 4) comprising a base body (1) having a truncated pyramid-shaped backstop (4; [0017], [0022] & [0031]) having at least 3 outward facing sides, an apex (Fig. 4) of the backstop is coupled to a hollow fill neck (3). Wakabayashi shows a filling nozzle (13) comprising a tubular holding portion/backstop (32; 92) having at least 3 outward facing sides (Fig. 9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of Vetten and/or Wakabayashi to modify the liquid transport spout of Baker so the liquid transport spout is constructed with a pyramid-shaped backstop having at least 3 outward facing sides as claimed to facilitate handling the spout and/or because the selection of the specific shape for the backstop such as the shaped as disclosed by Baker or Vetten or Wakabayashi or as claimed would have been an obvious matter of design choice inasmuch as the resultant structures will work equally well since a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results.
As to claim 15, Baker discloses the liquid transport spout as above having most of the limitations of the claim except for the backstop comprises a 3-faced truncated trapezoidal backstop.
Vetten teaches a liquid transport spout (Figs. 1-2 & 4) comprising a base body (1) having a truncated pyramid-shaped trapezoidal backstop (4; [0017], [0022] & [0031]) having at least 3 outward facing sides, an apex (Fig. 4) of the backstop is coupled to a hollow fill neck (3). Wakabayashi shows a filling nozzle (13) comprising a tubular holding portion/trapezoidal backstop (32; 92) having at least 3 outward facing sides (Fig. 9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of Vetten and/or Wakabayashi to modify the liquid transport spout of Baker so the liquid transport spout is constructed with a 3-faced truncated trapezoidal backstop having at least 3 outward facing sides as claimed to facilitate handling the spout and/or because the selection of the specific shape for the backstop such as the shaped as disclosed by Baker or Vetten or Wakabayashi or as claimed would have been an obvious matter of design choice inasmuch as the resultant structures will work equally well since a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results.
As to claims 2 and 16, Vetten further teaches a junction between the apex and fill neck is ribbed to form an increased diameter at the junction.
PNG
media_image1.png
194
325
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claims 3 and 17, Wakabayashi further shows cutouts (95) at a base of the at least 3 outward facing sides to form wing-like edges at corners of the backstop (Fig. 9).
As to claims 4-5 and 18-19, Vetten further teaches a threaded end cap (2) coupled to the at least one threads of the fill neck (Fig. 4).
As to claims 6 and 20, Baker further discloses a hollow flexible tube (26, 30, 32) coupled to the tube fitting end (Fig. 4).
As to claim 7, to the extent that the spout of Baker as modified further fails to show the hollow flexible tube is transparent, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the liquid transport spout of Baker as modified so the liquid transport spout is constructed with the hollow flexible tube and the hollow flexible tube is transparent as claimed to allow visual access to the contents within the hollow flexible tube and because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
As to claims 8 and 11, Baker discloses the liquid transport spout is a single integral device. To the extent that Baker fails to disclose the spout comprises the fill neck is removable from the backstop as claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the liquid transport spout of Baker so the liquid transport spout is constructed with the fill neck is removable from the backstop instead of the single integral device because it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art.
PNG
media_image2.png
488
378
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As to claim 10, Baker further discloses the tube-fitting end is ribbed (between two hinge points 14; Fig. 3). Vetten also teaches the backstop is ribbed (5).
As to claim 12, Baker further discloses the spout is formed from at least one of CNC’ing, casting and molding [0042].
As to claim 13, the backstop of the spout of Baker is capable to be rotatable around an axis of a vertical line/channel (see the vertical dash line as shown in Fig. 3).
As to claim 14, either Vetten or Wakabayashi teaches the faces of the backstop are asymmetric.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Newton (2,111,031).
The liquid transport spout of Baker as modified further fails to show the tube-fitting end is recessed into the backstop. Newton teaches a spout (1) comprising a backstop (4, 5) including an apex of the backstop is coupled to a hollow fill neck with a top flange (2) and a base of the backstop is coupled to a hollow tube-fitting end with a bottom flange (3). The hollow tube-fitting end is recessed into the backstop (Figs. 1-3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of Newton to modify the liquid transport spout of Baker as modified so the liquid transport spout is constructed with the hollow tube-fitting end is recessed into the backstop to prevent the liquid from spilling during usage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUAN K BUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4552. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F, 7-4.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Orlando E. Avilés can be reached on 571-270-5531 or orlando.aviles-bosques@uspto.gov. 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.
/LUAN K BUI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736