Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/775,582

CANNISTER FOR CONTAINING A LIQUID

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 17, 2024
Examiner
BALDRIGHI, ERIC C
Art Unit
3733
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
David Murrell
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
41%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 41% of resolved cases
41%
Career Allow Rate
77 granted / 188 resolved
-29.0% vs TC avg
Strong +44% interview lift
Without
With
+44.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
243
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.6%
+10.6% vs TC avg
§102
28.3%
-11.7% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 188 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Election/Restrictions Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121: A. Figures 1-2, many threaded parts lid assembly, claims 1-8 and 18-20 B. Figures 3-4, hollow lid, claims 1, 9-13 and 18 C. Figures 5-6, winged protrusion, claims 1 and 14-18 D. Figures 7, projecting solid plug, claim 1 During a telephone conversation with attorney of record Jeffrey Banyas on 1/21/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Species A, claim 1-8 and 18-20. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 9-17 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention. This application contains claims directed to the following patentably distinct species A-D. The species are independent or distinct because of the above reasons. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record. Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. Currently, claim 1 is generic. There is a serious search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply: Examination burden comes from developing and analyzing synonyms from each different class. Examination burden would also increase exponentially in subsequent actions as the subject matter further diverges due to increasing specificity of the separately classed claimed elements. Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election. The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species. Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species. Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141. 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 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Pub 20200138170 by Maurin et al. (hereinafter “Maurin”). Regarding claim 19, Maurin teaches an adapter (EAFM15B, adapter) for a cannister (Fig 11/16, a cannister is cosmetic container 300/400; wherein Figs 11-15 and 16-20, [0125] [0065-0072], "The applicator as shown in FIGS. 18-19 may also be included in the examples of FIGS. 1-15" (and hereby is included)) that contains a liquid ([0104] [0115] “cosmetic container” 300/400 for a “liquid”), said adapter comprising a first wall (EAFM15B, first wall) attached to a second wall (EAFM15B, second wall, attached), said first wall having a threaded inner surface (EAFM15B, fastener inner surface to neck, is a thread since [0104] "cap 322 may be attached to the sleeve 310 via… any other suitable method of attachment" wherein it discloses such attachments as being [0105] “threaded coupling”), and said second wall having a threaded outer surface (EAFM15B, thread to second wall, is a thread since [0105] "the outer cap 326 may include inner threads and the inner cap may include outer threads, instead of a snap fit or interference fit”); wherein the threaded inner surface is configured to mate with a threaded neck outer surface of a neck of the cannister (as cited above (fastener inner surface to neck), the threaded first wall inner surface can mate with corresponding threads of the neck’s outer surface); and wherein the threaded outer surface is configured to mate with a threaded first flange outer surface (as cited above (thread to second wall), the threaded second wall outer surface can mate with corresponding threads of a first lid flange outer surface) of a first flange (EAFM15B, lid flange) extending from a lid bottom surface of a lid (extends from the lid bottom surface). 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. Claims 1-5, 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub 20200138170 by Maurin et al. (hereinafter “Maurin”). Regarding claim 1, Maurin teaches a cannister (Fig 11/16, a cannister is cosmetic container 300/400; wherein Figs 11-15 and 16-20, [0125] [0065-0072], "The applicator as shown in FIGS. 18-19 may also be included in the examples of FIGS. 1-15" (and hereby is included)) for containing a liquid ([0104] [0115] “cosmetic container” 300/400 for a “liquid”), said cannister comprising: a cannister body (Fig 11/16, a cannister body is sleeve 310/410) having a bottom wall (see examiner annotated Maurin Figure 13, hereinafter “EAFM13”; EAFM13, bottom wall, wherein bottom depends on the orientation of the cannister, which is rotated from the original, as shown in the figure), at least one side wall (EAFM13, side wall), forming a hollow interior (EAFM13, hollow interior formed by the walls); at least one opening into the hollow interior (EAFM13, opening); a neck (EAFM13, neck) located at the at least one opening and having a neck outer surface and a neck inner surface (neck has an inner surface and an outer surface); and a lid having a lid bottom surface, at least one lid side surface, and a lid top surface (see examiner annotated Maurin Figure 15B, hereinafter “EAFM15B”; EAFM15B, a lid is shown having a lid top surface, a lid bottom surface, and a side surface); and wherein the lid is configured to seal to at least a portion of the neck inner surface (examiner notes that no part of Applicant’s elected invention (Figs 1-2) lid touches the neck because of the adapter in between; however, the prior art lid shows capable of sealing the opening/neck/neck inner surface from the outside). PNG media_image1.png 632 435 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 401 843 media_image2.png Greyscale But first embodiment Maurin does not explicitly teach a cannister body top wall. However, Maurin teaches a top wall; a neck extending upwardly from the top wall (see examiner annotated Maurin Figure 19, hereinafter “EAFM19”; EAFM19, a cannister body top wall is shown, with a cannister body neck extending upwardly from the top wall), said top wall comprising at least one opening into the hollow interior (EAFM19, opening, opens into hollow interior). PNG media_image3.png 461 610 media_image3.png Greyscale Therefore, since Maurin discloses it obvious to combine the two embodiments ([0125] [0065-0072], "The applicator as shown in FIGS. 18-19 may also be included in the examples of FIGS. 1-15") and Maurin teaches a top wall as claimed (above), along with related elements including a bevel portion of the adapter second wall extending past the top wall (EAFM19, inward bevel portion) and an applicator and wand (Fig 19, “applicator” 449, a wand is stem 437 that extends from the lid bottom surface, [0124] 449 is a “doefoot, sponge”, wherein ‘doefoot’ is rounded thereby ball shape, and the sponge is absorbent, and 449 shown opposite from the lid bottom surface) in light of dependent claims 4 and 8, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cannister body side wall of Maurin with the top wall as taught by Maurin in order to advantageously better hold a cap having an applicator, and (for the dependents) modify an adapter second wall portion including an extending bevel to beneficially be able to limit the applicator/wand movement for less mess while being able to apply contents without a user’s finger directly. Regarding claim 2, Maurin further teaches an adapter (EAFM15B, adapter) having a first wall (EAFM15B, first wall) attached to a second wall (EAFM15B, second wall, attached), said first wall having a threaded inner surface (EAFM15B, fastener inner surface to neck, is a thread [0104] "cap 322 may be attached to the sleeve 310 via… any other suitable method of attachment" wherein it discloses such attachments as [0105] “threaded coupling”), and said second wall having a threaded outer surface (EAFM15B, thread to second wall, is a thread since [0105] "the outer cap 326 may include inner threads and the inner cap may include outer threads, instead of a snap fit or interference fit”); wherein the neck is configured to mate to the adapter by having a threaded neck outer surface (as cited above, the neck outer surface can be threaded to mate with the adapter first wall), the threaded inner surface of the first wall being configured to mate with the threaded neck outer surface (see above); and wherein the lid comprises a first flange (EAFM15B, lid flange) extending from the lid bottom surface (extends from lid bottom surface) and having a threaded first flange outer surface, and the threaded outer surface of the second wall being configured to mate with the threaded first flange outer surface (EAFM15B thread to second wall, is on the first lid flange outer surface, capable of mating the second wall to first flange). Regarding claim 3, Maurin further teaches at least a portion of the second wall extends past the top wall and into the hollow interior when the adapter is mated to the neck (EAFM19, an adapter second wall portion extends into and past the top wall). See details in the parent claim 1 rejection above, including the motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify. Regarding claim 4, Maurin further teaches the portion of the second wall which extends past the top wall and into the hollow interior is beveled inwardly (EAFM19, inward bevel portion). See details in the parent claim 1 rejection above, including the motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify. Regarding claim 5, Maurin further teaches the lid comprises a second flange (EAFM15B, second flange) extending from the lid bottom surface about an outer perimeter of the lid defined by the at least one lid side surface (extends from the lid bottom surface about an outer perimeter of the lid defined by the at least one lid side surface). Regarding claim 8, Maurin further teaches an applicator (Fig 19, “applicator” 449) having a wand (Fig 19, a wand is stem 437) extending from the lid bottom surface (437 extends from the lid bottom surface) and an absorbent applicator ball connected to a wand end ([0124] 449 is a “doefoot, sponge”, wherein ‘doefoot’ is rounded thereby ball shape, and the sponge is absorbent) which is opposite the lid bottom surface (449 shown opposite from the lid bottom surface). See details in the parent claim 1 rejection above, including the motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify. Regarding claim 18, Maurin further teaches the liquid is selected from the group consisting of an adhesive, a rubber cement, and a nail polish ([0124] “for applying liquid… eye gel” which is an adhesive to the eye area). Claims 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub 20200138170 by Maurin et al. (hereinafter “Maurin”) as applied to claim 19 above. Regarding claim 20, Maurin first embodiment does not explicitly teach at least a portion of the second wall extends past a top wall of the cannister and into a hollow interior of the cannister when the threaded inner surface is mated with the threaded neck outer surface. However, Maurin teaches a top wall; a neck extending upwardly from the top wall (see examiner annotated Maurin Figure 19, hereinafter “EAFM19”; EAFM19, a cannister body top wall is shown, with a cannister body neck extending upwardly from the top wall), said top wall comprising at least one opening into the hollow interior (EAFM19, opening); and at least a portion of the second wall extends past a top wall of the cannister and into a hollow interior of the cannister when threads mate (EAFM19, an adapter second wall portion extends into (the hollow interior) and past the top wall). Therefore, since Maurin discloses it obvious to combine the two embodiments ([0125] [0065-0072], "The applicator as shown in FIGS. 18-19 may also be included in the examples of FIGS. 1-15") and Maurin teaches a top wall as claimed (above), along with related elements including a bevel portion of the adapter second wall extending past the top wall (EAFM19, inward bevel portion), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cannister body side wall of Maurin with the top wall as taught by Maurin in order to advantageously better hold a cap having an applicator, and modify an adapter second wall portion to extend past the top wall to beneficially be able to limit the applicator movement for less mess. Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub 20200138170 by Maurin et al. (hereinafter “Maurin”) in view of US Pat 4896782 issued to Hawkins et al. (hereinafter “Hawkins”). Regarding claim 6, Maurin does not explicitly teach a first sealing member connected to a portion of the lid bottom surface between the first flange and the second flange. Hawkins, however, teaches a first sealing member connected to a portion of the lid bottom surface between a first flange and a second flange (Figs 7 & 9, O-ring 36 is a sealing member that seals between two flanges, and is shown connected to a portion of a lid bottom surface). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the engaged gap between the first and second flange of Maurin by installing a seal ring as taught by Hawkins in order to advantageously improve the sealing engagement. Regarding claim 7, Maurin further teaches the first sealing member is selected from the group consisting of a gasket, an o-ring, and combinations thereof (Fig 7, 36 is an O-ring). See details in the parent claim 6 rejection above, including the motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC C BALDRIGHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 EST. 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, Nathan Jenness can be reached on 5712705055. 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. /ERIC C BALDRIGHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3733 /NATHAN J JENNESS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3733 29 January 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 17, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600539
FOOD SPOILAGE MONITORING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589921
FOOD THERMOMETER STORAGE BOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589919
LID ASSEMBLY FOR BEVERAGE CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583649
Modified Sidewall of Tethered Closure
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583647
Tethered Cap and Spout
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
41%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+44.0%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 188 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month