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
An amendment was filed on 01/19/2026. Claim 7 was canceled, claims 1, 19-20 have been amended, and claim 21 has been added. Currently, claims 1-6 and 8-21 are pending and are being examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive and/or are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In response to the applicant’s argument that Bazin cannot teach or suggest that the base includes at least one recessed surface surrounding the connector and the terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls extend beyond the recessed surface such that the terminal ends form a plurality of feet configured to directly contact a resting surface, wherein Merner does not cure the deficiencies as it is not a rigid, self-standing container and does not have a base with the recessed surface so that the connector is recessed along the z-axis relative to the terminal ends”, and Elton does not cure the above deficiencies, the examiner notes that newly cited Miller (US 3179323) is utilized to more clearly teach these limitations and as such the argument is rendered moot.
However, it is noted that the z-axis in any given invention of the prior art may be readily defined depending on the starting reference point. Moreover, Bazin already teaches wherein the connector is pointing along the z-axis as defined. Miller merely teaches the use of a recess for the container to not extend beyond the walls such that the ends of the walls may serve as a surface to place onto a level resting surface.
Further, Elton merely teaches that the container remains upright in between filling and emptying and is not utilized to teach the recess.
Lastly, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the structure being rigid) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In response to the applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 19, wherein Cesa’s handle does not disclose a handle formed by aligned cutouts in two adjacent planar sidewalls of a polygonal, rigid, multi-wall housing, and Cesa’s handle does not define a truncated portion of the interior of the housing while an outer perimeter of the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not impacted by the handle”, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Cesa teaches a cutout that goes through two adjacent walls, notably wherein adjacent merely means the two walls are next to each other and are not necessarily connected by a corner. Moreover, as the handle 26 is merely an opening through the container 10, it appears that it creates a truncated portion of the interior of the housing and remains hollow in order for fluid to enter.
In response to applicant’s argument with respect to claim 20 wherein Myerscough is different from instant claim 20 wherein it contemplates a separate card ‘outer’ and ‘liner’ as opposed to a single liquid packaging board sheet, it lacks a teaching for a metal layer to provide a light barrier, and lacks a teaching or suggestion of forming a waterproof sheet into the container, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
The metal layer providing a light barrier is provided by newly cited Inoue as described below, and as such this argument is rendered moot.
However, Myerscough does appear to teach a waterproof sheet as a container as the paperboard sheet is made of a liquid packaging board, and teaches a layer of ethylene vinyl alcohol which is described by Foundite to be a waterproof material, thus creating a waterproof layer.
Further, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the structure being a single liquid packaging board sheet) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 12-13, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazin (US 20190256270) in view of Cesa (US 20140121618), and further in view of Miller (US 3179323) and Elton (US 20090236338).
Regarding claim 1, Bazin discloses a container for holding a liquid solution intended for transport into a body of a patient (paragraph 0002), the container comprising:
a housing formed by a plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, a base, and a top (fig. 2, housing with 4 planar sidewalls, a top and a base), wherein:
the housing is structurally configured to hold the liquid solution without additional internal containers therein (fig. 2, no internal container within the housing),
the housing is hermetically sealed (paragraph 0157), and
the housing defines a cross-section normal to a central longitudinal axis (fig. 2, cross-section normal to central longitudinal axis, longitudinal axis going along the z axis) that approximates a polygon to promote grouping of multiple containers together into a predetermined group shape (fig. 2, square shape helps promote grouping of multiple containers);
a connector (4) disposed on the base of the housing (fig. 2, connection port 4) and structurally configured for engagement with tubing (5) for draining the liquid solution from the container into the tubing (fig. 2, connector 4 connected to flexible pipe 5), wherein the connector, when in a storage position, projects downwardly along a z-axis (fig. 2, connection port 4 projecting out the z axis).
Bazin does not teach a handle formed along one or more of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, and a fixture disposed on the housing, the fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use, wherein the connector projects downwardly along a z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base.
However, Cesa teaches a container that comprises both a handle formed on a planar sidewall (fig. 1, handle 26) and a fixture disposed on the housing configured for engagement with an external structure for handing the container when in use (fig. 1, carabineer 18 and/or hanging hole 16 for handing the bag)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that it comprises a handle formed along one or more of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, and a fixture disposed on the housing, the fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use, as taught by Cesa, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that lets a bag being held above the ground (see Cesa, paragraph 0016) and for holding a container for transport by a user (see Cesa, paragraph 0019).
Bazin does not teach the connector, in a storage position, projecting downwardly along a Z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base, wherein the structure includes at least one recessed surface surrounding the connector and the terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls extend beyond the recessed surface such that the terminal ends form a plurality of feet configured to directly contact a resting surface, and wherein the container can remain upright in absence of external forced when the feet are placed on the resting surface with the connector projecting therefrom along the z-axis, with or without the liquid solution present therein.
However, Miller teaches a shipping container for liquids (abstract) that, in a storage position, the connector projects downward along a Z-axis no further than the terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base (fig. 5, flat marginal portion 8 as the terminal ends of the walls, with cylindrical outlet portion 10 extending no further than the terminal ends of marginal portion 8. While the figure shows the bottle upright, the bottle may also be placed upside down as long as the seal remains intact), wherein the structure includes at least one recessed surface surrounding the connector (fig. 5, outlet 10 within a recess) and the terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls extend beyond the recessed surface such that the terminal ends form a plurality of feet configured to directly contact a resting surface (fig. 5, flat marginal portion 8 serve as feet),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the connector, in a storage position, projecting downwardly along a Z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base, wherein the structure includes at least one recessed surface surrounding the connector and the terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls extend beyond the recessed surface such that the terminal ends form a plurality of feet configured to directly contact a resting surface, as taught by Miller, for the purpose of providing safe and convenient storage for shipping the container (see Miller, col. 2, lines 16-20)
Bazin, as modified by Miller, discloses wherein the container remains upright in absence of external forces when placed on a level surface with the connector projecting along the z-axis, with the liquid solution present therein (see Bazin, figure 7 shows the container on a level surface of storage device 10 standing upright), but is silent to wherein the container can remain upright in absence of external forced when the feet are placed on the resting surface with the connector projecting therefrom along the z-axis, with or without the liquid solution present therein.
However, Elton teaches a biocontainer (abstract) that is capable of remaining upright with or without fluid (fig. 2 shows the container upright with the connector 136 facing downwards without fluid, fig. 1 shows the container upright with the connector 136 facing downwards with fluid). While the storage device for this container is shown to have a slanted floor to guide the positioning of the container within the tote, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that this would also remain upright on a level surface with a guiding opening, similar to that of Bazin, due to having a flat bottom and a drainage tube that is supported by the hole in the storage device of Bazin.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the container can remain upright in absence of external forced when the feet are placed on the resting surface with the connector projecting therefrom along the z-axis, with or without the liquid solution present therein. The connector can be projecting, as taught by Elton, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that grants a support member to promote proper draining of the container (see Elton, paragraph 0031).
Regarding claim 2, Bazin discloses wherein the housing has four substantially planar sidewalls (fig. 11, 3D bag with 4 walls as a box).
Regarding claim 3, Bazin discloses wherein the cross-section approximates a rectangle (fig. 2, box cross section approximates a square, wherein a square is a rectangle).
Regarding claim 4, Bazin discloses wherein the predetermined group shape approximates a rectangular box (fig. 2, each container is a rectangular box, and each box can be stored side by side to create a rectangular box, or stacked on top of one another).
Regarding claim 5, Bazin discloses wherein the housing is at least semitransparent (paragraph 0055).
Regarding claim 6, Bazin does not teach the device further comprising one or more markings on one or more sidewalls, the one or more markings related to a volume of the liquid solution within the container.
However, Cesa teaches one or more markings on one or more sidewalls (fig. 1, calibrations 28), the one or more markings related to a volume of the liquid solution within the container (fig. 1, calibrations 28 with volume measurements up to 1000 mL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that it further comprises one or more markings on one or more sidewalls, the one or more markings related to a volume of the liquid solution within the container, as taught by Cesa, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that allows a user to see the volume of liquid contained (see Cesa, paragraph 0024).
Regarding claim 8, Bazin discloses wherein the housing is hollow but for the liquid solution (fig. 2 demonstrates a hollow interior. Even assuming connector 4 protrudes into the container, the connector 4 may also be interpreted as being part of the housing, and thus the housing is still considered hollow).
Regarding claim 12, Bazin does not teach wherein the connector projects downwardly along the z-axis no further than junctions between the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls and the base.
However, Miller teaches wherein the connector projects downwardly along the z-axis no further than junctions between the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls and the base (fig. 5, outlet portion 10 projects no further than the edges of the container and the base).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the connector projects downwardly along the z-axis no further than junctions between the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls and the base, as taught by Miller, for the purpose of providing safe and convenient storage for shipping the container (see Miller, col. 2, lines 16-20)
Regarding claim 13, Bazin does not teach wherein maximum dimensions of the cross-section of the housing are not impacted by the handle.
However, Cesa teaches wherein the maximum dimensions of the cross-section of the housing are not impacted by the handle (fig. 1 shows handle 26 not extending the entirety of the bag, and as such does not affect the maximum cross section of the bag)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the maximum dimensions of the cross-section of the housing are not impacted by the handle, as taught by Cesa, for holding a container for transport by a user (see Cesa, paragraph 0019).
Regarding claim 15, Bazin does not teach wherein the connector is movable between the storage position and a draining position, and wherein the connector projects further downward along the z-axis when in the draining position.
However, Miller teaches wherein the connector (10) is movable between the storage position and a draining position (fig. 5 shows the storage position, fig. 4 shows the draining position), and wherein the connector projects further downwards along the z-axis when in the draining position (fig. 4 shows the outlet 10 further out in the z-axis).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the connector is movable between the storage position and a draining position, and wherein the connector projects further downward along the z-axis when in the draining position, as taught by Miller, for the purpose of providing safe and convenient storage for shipping the container (see Miller, col. 2, lines 16-20).
Regarding claim 18, Bazin discloses wherein the container is configured for use in a dialysis treatment (Fig. 2, any container is configured for use in a dialysis treatment, especially since the container is for biopharmaceutical fluids, paragraph 0002).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazin in view of Cesa Miller, and Elton, and further in view of Myerscough (WO 2023007150).
Regarding claim 9, Bazin does not teach wherein the housing is made from plastic-coated paper.
However, Myerscough teaches a means for holding liquid (abstract) that comprises a housing made from plastic-coated paper (pg. 18, lines 1-9 discuss card outer blank with a liner having a polymeric component, such as ethylene vinyl alcohol film).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the housing is made from plastic-coated paper, as taught by Myerscough, for the purpose of providing a suitable material that is recyclable and that grants a barrier to bacteria and contaminants (see Myerscough, pg. 5, lines 4-14), and since 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 (i.e., holding liquids). In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 10, Bazin does not teach wherein the housing is made from liquid packaging board.
However, Myerscough teaches wherein liquid housings made from liquid packaging board are well known in the art (pg. 17, lines 17-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the housing is made from liquid packaging board, as taught by Myerscough, for the purpose of providing a suitable material that is recyclable and that grants a barrier to bacteria and contaminants (see Myerscough, pg. 5, lines 4-14), and since 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 (i.e., holding liquids). In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazin in view of Cesa, Miller, and Elton, further in view of McPhee (US 3921630).
Regarding claim 11, Bazin does not teach wherein the housing is blow molded.
However, the Office has interpreted this claim limitation as a Product-by-Process claim, wherein the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. See MPEP 2113. In this instance, because the material in Bazin can be blow molded into a container, the limitation of the housing being blow molded does not affect the patentability of the claim.
If this is not clearly envisioned by the applicant, McPhee teaches wherein containers for medical fluid being blow-molded are well known in the art (col. 4, lines 18-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the housing is blow molded, as taught by McPhee, since 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 design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 17, Bazin does not teach wherein the tubing is part of an intravenous delivery system.
However, McPhee teaches wherein a bag system used in intravenous delivery system are well known in the art (col. 2, lines 18-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the tubing is part of an intravenous delivery system, as taught by McPhee, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that utilizes the device for intravenous administration of liquid such as saline (see McPhee, col. 2, lines 18-23, and col. 1, lines 13-15).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazin in view of Cesa, Miller, and Elton, and further in view of Sikas (US 4715728).
Regarding claim 14, Bazin, as modified by Ref B, does not teach wherein the fixture is movable from a storage position where it is flush or recessed relative to an external surface of the housing and an in-use position where it extends from the housing.
However, Sfikas teaches wherein the fixture (32) is movable from a storage position where it is flush to an external surface of the housing (fig. 1, hanger 32 flipped downwards and flush against first flap 10) and an in-use position where it extends from the housing (fig. 2, hanger 32 flipped up for hanging with hook 40)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin in view of Ref B such that the fixture is movable from a storage position where it is flush or recessed relative to an external surface of the housing and an in-use position where it extends from the housing, as taught by Sfikas, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that allow for more compact storage when not hanging.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazin in view of Cesa, Miller, and Elton, and further in view of Tom (US 20140374416). Trisure is utilized as extrinsic evidence.
Regarding claim 16, Bazin does not teach wherein the connector includes a vented cap.
However, Tom teaches wherein vented caps are well known structures in the art (paragraph 070).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the connector includes a vented cap, as taught by Tom, for the purpose of providing the known function of regulating pressure and preventing the accumulation of hazardous gases while maintain a secure seal (see Trisure).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazin in view of Cesa, and further in view of Miller.
Regarding claim 19, Bazin discloses a system comprising:
a liquid solution intended for transport into a body of a patient (paragraph 0002), and
a container comprising:
a housing formed by a plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, a base, and a top (fig. 2, housing with 4 planar sidewalls, a top and a base), wherein:
the housing holds the liquid solution without additional internal containers therein (fig. 2, no internal container within the housing),
the housing is hermetically sealed (paragraph 0157), and
the housing defines a cross-section normal to a central longitudinal axis (fig. 2, cross-section normal to central longitudinal axis, longitudinal axis going along the z axis) that approximates a polygon to promote grouping of multiple containers together into a predetermined group shape (fig. 2, square shape helps promote grouping of multiple containers);
a connector (4) disposed on the base of the housing (fig. 2, connection port 4) and structurally configured for engagement with tubing (5) for draining the liquid solution from the container into the tubing (fig. 2, connector 4 connected to flexible pipe 5), wherein the connector, when in a storage position, projects downwardly along a z-axis (fig. 2, connection port 4 projecting out the z axis).
Bazin does not teach a handle formed along one or more of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, wherein the handle is formed by aligned cutouts in two adjacent ones of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, and wherein the handle defines a hollow handle portion that is in fluid communication with a remainder of an interior of the housing such that the liquid solution can occupy the hollow handle portion, the handle defining a truncated portion of the interior of the housing while an outer perimeter of the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not impacted by the handle and a fixture disposed on the housing, the fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use, wherein the connector projects downwardly along a z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base.
However, Cesa teaches a container that comprises both a handle formed on a planar sidewall (fig. 1, handle 26) and a fixture disposed on the housing configured for engagement with an external structure for handing the container when in use (fig. 1, carabineer 18 and/or hanging hole 16 for handing the bag). Said handle is formed by aligned cutouts in two adjacent ones of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls (fig. 1, handle 26 as an opening through the container 10 with sealed edges), and wherein the handle defines a hollow handle portion that is in fluid communication with a remainder of an interior of the housing such that the liquid solution can occupy the hollow handle portion (fig. 1, handle 26 is an opening through the container, wherein the handle does not close off the volume adjacent to it), the handle defining a truncated portion of the interior of the housing while an outer perimeter of the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not impacted by the handle (fig. 1, as the handle 26 is within the body of the cross-section of the polygon, the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not affected)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that it comprises a handle formed along one or more of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, aligned cutouts in two adjacent ones of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, and wherein the handle defines a hollow handle portion that is in fluid communication with a remainder of an interior of the housing such that the liquid solution can occupy the hollow handle portion, the handle defining a truncated portion of the interior of the housing while an outer perimeter of the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not impacted by the handle and a fixture disposed on the housing, the fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use, as taught by Cesa, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that lets a bag being held above the ground (see Cesa, paragraph 0016) and for holding a container for transport by a user (see Cesa, paragraph 0019).
Bazin does not teach the connector, in a storage position, projecting downwardly along a Z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base.
However, Miller teaches a shipping container for liquids (abstract) that, in a storage position, the connector projects downward along a Z-axis no further than the terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base (fig. 5, flat marginal portion 8 as the terminal ends of the walls, with cylindrical outlet portion 10 extending no further than the terminal ends of marginal portion 8. While the figure shows the bottle upright, the bottle may also be placed upside down as long as the seal remains intact)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that the connector, in a storage position, projecting downwardly along a Z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base, as taught by Miller, for the purpose of providing safe and convenient storage for shipping the container (see Miller, col. 2, lines 16-20)
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bazin in view of Myerscough, and further in view of Cesa and Inoue (US 20100298804). Foundite is utilized as extrinsic evidence.
Regarding claim 20, Bazin discloses a method of manufacturing a container, comprising:
forming the container comprising:
substantially planar sidewalls, a top, and a base (fig. 2, housing with 4 planar sidewalls, a top and a base),
wherein the container defines a cross-section normal to a central longitudinal axis (fig. 2, cross-section normal to central longitudinal axis, longitudinal axis going along the z axis) that approximates a polygon to promote grouping of multiple containers together into a predetermined group shape (fig. 2, square shape helps promote grouping of multiple containers);
a portion of the base formed for engagement with a connector structurally configured for engagement with tubing (fig. 2, base with a connector 4 to connect with flexible pipe 5);
filling the container with a liquid solution (paragraphs 0001-0002); and
sealing the container (paragraph 0157).
Bazin does not teach the method comprising forming a paperboard sheet, applying a coating to the paperboard sheet to create a waterproof sheet, forming the waterproof sheet into the container comprising: a handle formed along one or more of the substantially planar sidewalls; a fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use; and
However, Myerscough teaches a method of creating a container comprising forming a paperboard sheet made of a liquid packaging board (pg. 17, lines 17-26), applying a coating to the paperboard sheet to create a waterproof sheet (pg. 17, lines 1-9 describe a laminate film material of ethylene vinyl alcohol film, see Foundite that describes EVA film being waterproof), and forming the waterproof sheet into the container (fig. 2, also pg. 5, lines 15-28 describes the liner being within the card outer 2 and holding the contents of the carton)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed in Bazin such that it comprises forming a paperboard sheet made of a liquid packaging board, applying a coating to the paperboard sheet to create a waterproof sheet, and forming the waterproof sheet into the container, as taught by Myerscough, for the purpose of providing a suitable material that is recyclable and that grants a barrier to bacteria and contaminants (see Myerscough, pg. 5, lines 4-14).
Bazin doesn’t teach a handle formed along one or more of the substantially planar sidewalls, a fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use.
However, Cesa teaches a container that comprises both a handle formed on a planar sidewall (fig. 1, handle 26) and a fixture disposed on the housing configured for engagement with an external structure for handing the container when in use (fig. 1, carabineer 18 and/or hanging hole 16 for handing the bag)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed in Bazin such that it comprises a handle formed along one or more of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, and a fixture disposed on the housing, the fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use, as taught by Cesa, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that lets a bag being held above the ground (see Cesa, paragraph 0016) and for holding a container for transport by a user (see Cesa, paragraph 0019).
Bazin, as modified by Myerscough, does not teach a method of applying a metal layer to the paperboard sheet to provide a light barrier.
However, Inoue teaches a package for liquid products (abstract) that comprise a metal layer to provide a light barrier (paragraph 0114).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed in Bazin in view of Myerscough such that it comprises applying a metal layer to the paperboard sheet to provide a light barrier, as taught by Inoue, for the purpose of providing a suitable means of preventing a potential drug of being degraded by light (see Inoue, paragraph 0114).
Claim 21 (containing the limitations of claim 19) is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barton (US 3161310) in view of Cesa, and further in view of Miller and Bazin.
Regarding claim 21, Barton discloses a system, comprising:
a liquid solution configured for transmission into a body of a patient (col. 1, lines 14-19); and
a container (fig. 2, container 20) comprising:
a housing formed by a plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, a base, and a top (fig. 2, housing made by sidewalls, a base with a neck 21, and a top. Col. 3, lines 43-55 describe the container having a square cross-section, and therefore has planar sidewalls), wherein:
the housing holds the liquid solution without additional internal containers therein (fig. 2, container 20 holds a fluid and absent an additional container therein),
the housing is sealed (fig. 1 shoes the container 20 closed by a cap 22 and covered by a plastic film seal 23), and the housing defines a cross-section normal to a central longitudinal axis that approximates a polygon to promote grouping of multiple containers together into a predetermined group shape (Col. 3, lines 43-55 describe the container having a square cross-section);
a fixture disposed on the housing (26), the fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use (fig. 2, suspension member 26 to be hung from a suitable carrier 27 as a hook); and
a connector (21) disposed on the base of the housing and structurally configured for engagement with tubing for draining the liquid solution from the container into the tubing (fig. 2, a neck 21 conducts solution to a patient via an administration set 28 which appears to include tubing such as with a cannula or spike),
wherein the housing is structurally configured to maintain its shape during filling and draining of the liquid solution such that the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls maintain their planar configuration (claim 1 describes when the hollow container is substantially rigid enough to maintain its shape when being filled. This appears to be a transitive property where if the container keeps it shape when going from empty to full, it appears to keep its shape from full to empty, wherein claim 1 describes the container as substantially rigid. Claim 2 clarifies the structure as deformable but sufficiently rigid).
Barton is silent to wherein the container is hermetically sealed, and does not teach a handle formed along one or more of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, wherein the handle is formed by aligned cutouts in two adjacent ones of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, and wherein the handle defines a hollow handle portion that is in fluid communication with a remainder of an interior of the housing such that the liquid solution can occupy the hollow handle portion, the handle defining a truncated portion of the interior of the housing while an outer perimeter of the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not impacted by the handle, wherein the connector, when in a storage position, projects downwardly along a z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base.
However, Cesa teaches a container that comprises both a handle formed on a planar sidewall (fig. 1, handle 26) and a fixture disposed on the housing configured for engagement with an external structure for handing the container when in use (fig. 1, carabineer 18 and/or hanging hole 16 for handing the bag). Said handle is formed by aligned cutouts in two adjacent ones of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls (fig. 1, handle 26 as an opening through the container 10 with sealed edges), and wherein the handle defines a hollow handle portion that is in fluid communication with a remainder of an interior of the housing such that the liquid solution can occupy the hollow handle portion (fig. 1, handle 26 is an opening through the container, wherein the handle does not close off the volume adjacent to it), the handle defining a truncated portion of the interior of the housing while an outer perimeter of the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not impacted by the handle (fig. 1, as the handle 26 is within the body of the cross-section of the polygon, the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not affected)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Bazin such that it comprises a handle formed along one or more of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, aligned cutouts in two adjacent ones of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls, and wherein the handle defines a hollow handle portion that is in fluid communication with a remainder of an interior of the housing such that the liquid solution can occupy the hollow handle portion, the handle defining a truncated portion of the interior of the housing while an outer perimeter of the cross-section that approximates the polygon is not impacted by the handle and a fixture disposed on the housing, the fixture structurally configured for engagement with an external structure for hanging the container when in use, as taught by Cesa, for the purpose of providing a suitable structure that lets a bag being held above the ground (see Cesa, paragraph 0016) and for holding a container for transport by a user (see Cesa, paragraph 0019).
Barton is silent to wherein the container is hermetically sealed, and does not teach the connector, in a storage position, projecting downwardly along a Z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base.
However, Miller teaches a shipping container for liquids (abstract) that, in a storage position, the connector projects downward along a Z-axis no further than the terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base (fig. 5, flat marginal portion 8 as the terminal ends of the walls, with cylindrical outlet portion 10 extending no further than the terminal ends of marginal portion 8. While the figure shows the bottle upright, the bottle may also be placed upside down as long as the seal remains intact).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Barton such that the connector, in a storage position, projecting downwardly along a Z-axis no further than terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls disposed adjacent to the base, wherein the structure includes at least one recessed surface surrounding the connector and the terminal ends of the plurality of substantially planar sidewalls extend beyond the recessed surface such that the terminal ends form a plurality of feet configured to directly contact a resting surface, as taught by Miller, for the purpose of providing safe and convenient storage for shipping the container (see Miller, col. 2, lines 16-20).
Barton is silent to wherein the container is hermetically sealed.
However, Bazin teaches wherein hermetically sealing containers is a known practice in the art (paragraph 0157).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed in Barton such that the container is hermetically sealed, as taught by Bazin, for the purpose of providing a suitable seal that properly prevents the passage of air, gases, or liquids per the definition of a hermetic seal.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Thompson (US 4327861) discloses a fluid container with two depressions on walls with connecting edges for ease of holding.
Peace (US 3326421) discloses a retractable plastic bottle spout.
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 BRANDON W LEVY whose telephone number is (571)272-7582. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM- 4:00 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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at 5712705879. 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.
/Brandon W. Levy/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/REBECCA E EISENBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3781