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 .
Priority
In light of the conducted interview on Feb. 09th., 2026; applicant was made aware the filed copy of the foreigner documents on Aug. 20, 2024 is for different invention and not related to the current filed application.
The filed foreign application on Feb. 9, 2026 was with Doc. No. 102001900928277 and pub. Date of 09/11/2002, see below copy of the first filed page of the document. As has been explained it appears that the filed priority document was wrong and not related to the current filed application.
PNG
media_image1.png
456
786
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The correct copy of the claimed priority document still required.
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) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fumanelli (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0002944).
Regarding claim 1: Fumanelli discloses a security container cassette for banknotes or valuables for Bancomat (i.e. cash machines) or ATMs, defining an internal volume and comprising perimeter walls including an upper wall, see for example (Figs. 1-3 & 7-8; via the security container cassette 1 for Cash machines, ATM, and the like 50):
- said upper wall (Fig. 7; via 1b) developing along an upper surface (Fig. 7; via 11) and comprising:
- a frame (Fig. 3; via the shown frame of container1) structurally in one piece with at least part of other said perimeter walls,
- a main opening (via at 11) occupying most of said upper wall (1a),
- a main container (via 2) arranged in said internal volume (1c) and in said main opening (11) and comprising:
- an upper side (via 21) developing along said upper surface (1a) and covering said main opening (11) and at least part of said frame, said upper side being provided with passing through upper openings (Fig. 4; via openings 20a),
- a lower side (Fig. 7; via 2a), arranged within said main volume and comprising passing through lower openings (Fig. 8; via shown openings at 2a),
- side walls (Fig. 6; via 25) suitable for connecting said upper side (2b) and said lower side (2a),
- constraint means suitable for rigidly constraining said upper side to said frame (paragraph 0060; “connection flanges 21, designed to firmly attach to the lid 10, by means of connection means such as screws or glues”).
- an internal container (Fig. 7; via 22) inside said main container (2), which is fluid-tight and configured to hold marking fluid (intended use limitations of the internal container, not given much patentable weight; further paragraph 0032; “container 2 designed to contain making fluid”).
Per the latest filed amendment on 06/09/2026; Fumanelli suggest the claimed passing through upper openings with series of circumferentially and radially interrupted circular holes (Fig. 4; via 20a). Fumanelli does not disclose openings with series of linear segments aligned with long edges of the container cassette nor segments at 45 degrees with respect to the long edges of the container cassette. However, coming up with different shape or number of the disclosed Fumanelli openings 20a, to be linear and/or with a 45 degrees angle, would only be a matter of engineering design choice to be made.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified Fumanelli’s openings by other’s more with linear and/or 45 degrees of openings, since it would only be a matter of engineering design choice to come up with the shape and/or number of those passing through openings.
Further, the amended claims repeatedly referring to an intended use term “configured to”, which render the followed claimed limitations to be broad and not positively cited limitations. Therefore, it is noted that the claimed limitations followed by “configured to” are not fully given patentable weight.
Regarding claim 2: wherein said main container is made of metal (paragraph 0036; “In particular, it can be made of metal or polymer sheets”).
Regarding claim 3: Fumanelli may not suggest that the main container has walls less than 1 mm thick. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified Fumanelli’s main container wall thickness to be less than 1 mm, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215.
Regarding claim 4: wherein said perimeter walls are made of polymeric material; (paragraph 0036; “In particular, it can be made of metal or polymer sheets”).
Regarding claim 5: wherein said upper side is in one piece (Fig. 4; via 20).
Regarding claim 6: wherein said lower side has a smaller main surface area than the area of said main opening so that it can pass through said main opening (Fig. 7; via 2a is smaller than 2b to pass through opening 11).
Regarding claim 7: wherein said pass-through lower openings include sharp edges suitable for cutting said internal container in the event of impact, see for example (Fig. 8 & paragraph 0037; “The lower portion 2a may also comprise inward facing cutting elements for the second container 22”).
Regarding claim 8: wherein said lower side is arranged above the area occupied by said banknotes or valuables, see for example (Figs. 3 & 7; via lower side of 2 arranged above area 1c of 10).
Regarding claim 9: wherein said main opening (via 11) occupies at least 2/3 of said upper part (1b).
Regarding claim 10: wherein said upper part (Fig. 7; via 20) is arranged along a lid (1b) of said cassette.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As set forth above the Office believes that the applied art of Fumanelli ‘944 suggests the amended claims referring to series of passing-through upper openings including radially interrupted circular holes (Fig. 4; via 20a). The office as explained above believes that coming up with further more openings to be in different shapes and number, would be only a matter of engineering design choice to be made.
Further, the Office explained that a recitation of the intended use term “configured to” of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Conclusion
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 SAMEH TAWFIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4470. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 AM - 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, Shelle Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
/SAMEH TAWFIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights