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, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hervet et al., WO 2020053210 A1.
Regarding claim 1,
A liquid storage bottle comprising a bottle main body (Fig. 1, Item 10), a nozzle configured to supply liquid externally (Fig. 3, dispensing system 2 and at least actuating member 4), and a cap (Fig. 3, protective cap 8) configured to cover the nozzle (Page 2, Lines 4-10, "The invention meets this need by virtue of a pressurized bottle having a container made of plastics material, comprising: a body, preferably formed as a single piece, that extends along a longitudinal axis and has a lower end, a neck that is integral with the body and has an upper end, the total height of the container being measured between the lower end of the body and the upper end of the neck..."; Page 5, Lines 21-25, "The container may contain a cosmetic product or the like. The container may contain a liquefied or compressed gas... The bottle may have a dispensing system for dispensing the cosmetic product contained in the container"; Page 8, Lines 20-21, "When not in use, the neck 20 is at least partially concealed by a removable protective cap 8"),
the bottle main body contains a recycled plastic material or a resin material obtained by mixing recycled plastic materials (Page 5, Lines 9-13, "The plastics material of the container advantageously includes at least one polymer chosen from the group consisting of… recycled polymers, notably referred to as PCR (post-consumer recycled) polymers, in particular recycled PET..."),
A>1 mm and A/B>1 are satisfied, where A is a thickness of a bottom surface center of the bottle main body (Fig. 7, e6) and B is an average thickness of a bottom surface edge of the bottle main body (Fig. 7, e5) (Figure 7, Items e5 and e6; Page 10, Lines 22-23, "Referring to figure 7, at the center 25 of the crown 19 of the indentation 18, the thickness e6 is at least 2.7 mm"; Page 9, Lines 27-28, "The container 3 furthermore has, at the lower end 30 of the body 10, a minimum thickness e5 of 2 mm, at the bottom line 29, as can be seen in figure 7”).
Regarding claim 2,
Wherein the recycled plastic material is one of PP, PE, PET, PVC, and PS or a mixture of two or more of PP, PE, PET, PVC, and PS (Claim 16, "The bottle (1) as claimed in any one of the preceding claims, wherein the plastics material includes at least one polymer chosen from the group consisting of PET or PETP, PEN, PCT, recycled polymers, notably referred to as PCR polymers, in particular recycled PET, bioPET, PP, PE, PEF, PET-G/PCT-G, PET with glass fibers, PC, POM, SMMA, PMMA, SAN, PBT, PA6, PA12, PEEK, PPO, PSU, filled polymers, notably with mineral fillers and/or glass fibers, and mixtures thereof").
Regarding claim 3,
Wherein a seam is formed on a bottom surface of the bottle main body (Page 8 Line 30 to Page 9 Line 2, "The frustoconical wall 18 is attached to a crown 19 of the indentation 16, forming in this example a substantially flat wall, which bears at its center 25 the trace of the injection point of the preform used to produce the container 3 by injection blow molding or compression blow molding"; It is known in the art that blow molding often results in a seam along the pinch-off point between the mold halves).
Regarding claim 4,
Wherein a thickness of a bottom surface of the bottle main body satisfies 1<A/Bmin<10, where Bmin is a minimum thickness of the bottom surface edge (Figure 7, Items e5 and e6; Page 10, Lines 22-23, "Referring to figure 7, at the center 25 of the crown 19 of the indentation 18, the thickness e6 is at least 2.7 mm"; Page 9, Lines 27-28, "The container 3 furthermore has, at the lower end 30 of the body 10, a minimum thickness e5 of 2 mm, at the bottom line 29, as can be seen in figure 7”).
Regarding claim 6,
Wherein a cross section parallel to a bottom surface of the bottle main body is a circle (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 9,
Wherein the recycled plastic material is a post-consumer material (Page 5, Lines 9-13, "The plastics material of the container advantageously includes at least one polymer chosen from the group consisting of… recycled polymers, notably referred to as PCR (post-consumer recycled) polymers, in particular recycled PET...").
Regarding claim 11,
A method of manufacturing a liquid storage bottle comprising a bottle main body, a nozzle configured to supply liquid externally, and a cap configured to cover the nozzle (Page 2, Lines 4-10, "The invention meets this need by virtue of a pressurized bottle having a container made of plastics material, comprising: a body, preferably formed as a single piece, that extends along a longitudinal axis and has a lower end, a neck that is integral with the body and has an upper end, the total height of the container being measured between the lower end of the body and the upper end of the neck..."; Page 5, Lines 21-25, "The container may contain a cosmetic product or the like. The container may contain a liquefied or compressed gas... The bottle may have a dispensing system for dispensing the cosmetic product contained in the container"; Page 8, Lines 20-21, "When not in use, the neck 20 is at least partially concealed by a removable protective cap 8"),
pinching a parison containing a recycled plastic material or a resin material obtained by mixing recycled plastic materials and forming the bottle main body by blowing air into the parison (Page 8 Line 30 to Page 9 Line 2, "The frustoconical wall 18 is attached to a crown 19 of the indentation 16, forming in this example a substantially flat wall, which bears at its center 25 the trace of the injection point of the preform used to produce the container 3 by injection blow molding or compression blow molding"),
A>1 mm and A/B>1 are satisfied, where A is a thickness of a bottom surface center of the formed bottle main body and B is an average thickness of a bottom surface edge of the bottle main body (Figure 7, Items e5 and e6; Page 10, Lines 22-23, "Referring to figure 7, at the center 25 of the crown 19 of the indentation 18, the thickness e6 is at least 2.7 mm"; Page 9, Lines 27-28, "The container 3 furthermore has, at the lower end 30 of the body 10, a minimum thickness e5 of 2 mm, at the bottom line 29, as can be seen in figure 7”).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hervet et al., WO 2020053210 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Beck et al., WO 9624482 A1.
Regarding claim 5,
Hervet et al. does not disclose:
Wherein a side surface of the bottle main body satisfies 1<C/Bmin<5, where C is a thickness of the side surface of the bottle main body in a center in a height direction positioned above the bottom surface edge of the minimum thickness in the height direction.
However, Beck et al. teaches a bottle known in the prior art to have a wall thickness between one and five times as large as its base thickness (Page 24, Table 1).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hervet so that the side of the bottle main body is between one and five times as thick as the minimum thickness of the bottom surface edge as taught by Beck. This would have been done to save costs in bottle production, as thickening the bottom surface edge can increase production costs (Beck at Pages 3-4, Lines 19-2, “In all polyester (usually PET) bottles, weight is a very important consideration. Based on a conservative estimate of 5 billion bottles produced per year and a PET price of $(US) 1.54 per Kg ($(US) 0.70 per pound), a 1-2 gram decrease in the PET content of a bottle will save approximately $(US) 7-14 million per year. Therefore, simply thickening the entire base of a petaloid based bottle to prevent rollout is undesirable”).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hervet et al., WO 2020053210 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sager, US 20190161225 A1.
Regarding claim 7,
Hervet et al. does not disclose:
Wherein a cross section parallel to a bottom surface of the bottle main body has a polygonal shape.
However, Sager teaches multiple possible embodiments of bottles, including those with triangular, square, or rectilinear cross sections (Figures 1-7).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hervet so that the cross section parallel to the bottom surface of the main bottle body has a polygonal shape, as taught by Saget. This would have been done to minimize wasted space when packing and transporting (Sager at Paragraph 0056, "As is shown in FIG. 4, the square and rectilinear cross sections result in the least amount of wasted space (a) in the locations adjacent to the main body portion AD of the bottle. This allows multiple bottles of similar shapes to be positioned adjacent to each other for storage, transport, etc.").
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hervet et al., WO 2020053210 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dewson et al., CA 3166140 A1.
Regarding claim 8,
Hervet et al. does not disclose:
Wherein the bottle main body contains 5 wt% or more of recycled plastic material.
However, Dewson et al. teaches an article for packaging which is substantially made from post-consumer resin, which is defined as having a composition of 95 wt% or more of post-consumer resin (Page 5, Lines 9-15, "In a first aspect, the present invention relates to a sustainable article for packaging. The sustainable article of the present invention is made from post-consumer resin (PCR) and preferably is substantially free of virgin plastic. By "substantially free" it is meant that the article comprises less than 5 wt%, preferably less than 3 wt%, more preferably less than 2 wt%, even more preferably less than 1 wt% or even 0 wt% of virgin plastic").
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hervet to have the bottle main body made of 5 wt% or more of recycled plastic material, as taught by Dewson. This would have been done to create a more sustainable article of manufacture which utilizes less virgin plastic (Dewson at Page 5, Lines 10-11, "The sustainable article of the present invention is made from post-consumer resin (PCR) and preferably is substantially free of virgin plastic").
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hervet et al., WO 2020053210 A1, further in view of Treleaven, US 20030230654 A1.
Regarding claim 10,
Hervet et al. does not disclose:
Wherein the recycled plastic material is a pre-consumer material.
However, the use of pre-consumer materials, also known as post-industrial or PIR materials, as a recycled plastic material for manufacture is an obvious simple substitution which is known in the art to yield predictable results. Treleaven, for example, teaches that plastic material can be made with post-industrial plastic waste (Treleaven at Paragraph 0011, “The following detailed description will be made with reference to the desired method of making plastic materials, such as plastic lumber, from recyclable plastics. Recyclable plastics… post-industrial plastic waste”).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hervet et al. to use a pre-consumer recycled plastic material so as to utilize industrial waste, as taught by Treleaven (Treleaven at Paragraph 0011, “The embodiment of the method disclosed herein of making plastic materials from recyclable plastics uses post-consumer plastic waste, but the method can be adapted to use other recyclable plastics, including industrial plastic waste”)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lontos and Gregoriou’s paper, “The effect of the deformation rate on the wall thickness of 1.5LT PET bottle during ISBM (Injection Stretch Blow Molding) process”, discloses methods of blow molding plastic preforms so as to control wall thickness. US 5337924 A discloses a flexible bottle made of soft plastic designed such that a user can eject a liquid by squeezing the sides of the bottle. Of particular note in this reference is Figure 7.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAMI ALSHOROOGI whose telephone number is (571)272-8946. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm.
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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571)431-0716. 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.
/RAMI A ALSHOROOGI//R.A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853