Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/777,815

METAL CONTAINER AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 19, 2024
Examiner
ELOSHWAY, NIKI MARINA
Art Unit
3736
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Tokyo Seikan Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
1002 granted / 1576 resolved
-6.4% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
76 currently pending
Career history
1652
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.9%
+11.9% vs TC avg
§102
33.8%
-6.2% vs TC avg
§112
12.0%
-28.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1576 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Election/Restrictions Claims 1-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on September 12, 2025. Applicant's election with traverse of Group II (claims 8-16) in the reply filed on September 12, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the process in claims 8-16 are specially adapted for the manufacture of the product in claims 1-7. This is not found persuasive because the method claims do not require the formation of the outwardly extending bulge in a holding portion, as set forth in the article claims. It is the examiner’s position that the method steps of forming the flange portion and performing a tip diameter reduction do not specifically require the formation of the bulge, as described in article claim 1. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. 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 8-11, 13, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porucznik et al. (GB2,061,790A) in view of Fedusa et al. (WO 2009158666A1). Porucznik et al. teaches a manufacturing method for a metal container (“cup”) including an opening portion, a sidewall portion, and a bottom portion (shown in figure 1), the manufacturing method comprising the steps of forming a bottomed cup by performing drawing processing on a sheet metal material (“cup drawing”; figure 1), trimming the bottomed cup (“trimming and base forming”; figure 1), performing tip diameter reduction drawing on the bottomed cup (page 1 line 115-page 2 line 14; figures 4, 5), forming the opening portion including a curled portion or a flange portion (page 2 lines 5-14; figure 1), and forming the sidewall portion having a tapered profile by performing diameter reduction drawing at a location closer to the bottom portion than a portion at which the tip diameter reduction drawing is performed. Porucznik et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the sidewall having a tapered profile. Fedusa et al. teaches that it is known to provide a container with a sidewall having a tapered profile (see figures 1-3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the method of Porucznik et al. with the container having a tapered profile, as taught by Fedusa et al., in order to allow the user to nest multiple cups so they may be stored in a smaller space. Regarding claim 9, the diameter reduction drawing is performed from the bottom portion side toward the opening portion (figures 4 and 5). Regarding claim 10, tapered portions and vertical portions are alternately formed at the sidewall portion by the diameter reduction drawing (see figures 4 and 6 of Fedusa et al.). Regarding claim 11, a longest tapered portion having a longest length, among the tapered portions, is formed in a vicinity of a height center of the sidewall portion (figure 3 of Fedusa et al.). Regarding claim 13, a base material of the sheet metal material is aluminum, an aluminum alloy, or steel (page 4 lines 16-23). Regarding claim 14, the sheet metal material is a resin-coated base material (lacquer is a natural resin; page 4 lines 16-23). Regarding claim 16, cleaning is not performed between or after a series of the steps (Porucznik et al. does not disclose a cleaning step). Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porucznik et al. (GB2,061,790A) in view of Fedusa et al. (WO 2009158666A1), as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Atsushi (JP 2017217700A). The modified method of Porucznik et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the printing step. Atsushi teaches that it is known to provide a method with a printing step (see “Printing and painting processes”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified method of Porucznik et al. with the printing step, as taught by Atsushi, in order to advertise the contents of the container. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porucznik et al. (GB2,061,790A) in view of Fedusa et al. (WO 2009158666A1), as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Roeterdink (ES 2344742 T3). The modified method of Porucznik et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the step of locally heating a portion to be processed in the curled portion or the flange portion. Roeterdink teaches that it is known to provide a method with a step of locally heating a portion to be processed in the curled portion or the flange portion (see “Printing and painting processes”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified method of Porucznik et al. with the step of locally heating a portion to be processed in the curled portion or the flange portion, as taught by Roeterdink, in order to easily bend the material to form the flange. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art is cited for the drawing method. THIS ACTION IS NON-FINAL. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIKI MARINA ELOSHWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4538. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7: 00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.. 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, Orlando E. Avilés can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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. /NIKI M ELOSHWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 19, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 06, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600560
HEATING UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589917
CLOSURES WITH TAMPER EVIDENCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12564280
WIRELESS DRINK CONTAINER FOR MONITORING HYDRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12553661
TRIM BREAKER WITH LIGHT-DIFFUSING OPTICAL FIBER FOR VACUUM INSULATED STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12546319
Can, And A Method For Producing Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
64%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+24.0%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1576 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