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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 20 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09/22/2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 09/22/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claims 3 and 12 be found allowable, claims 9 and 19 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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, 2, 4-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiese (US 6,854,596) in view of Dieter (US 2004/0004013).
Claims 1, 5 and 8
Wiese discloses a paper roll transport case device comprising a body (30) comprised of a lid (32) and an interior space (defined by space where container 20 is fits) (see column 3 lines 30-36); a first fastener comprising a zipper that secures the lid to the body (see column 3 lines 46-52). Wiese does not disclose a second fastener that attaches to the lid. However, Dieter discloses a container for a roll paper comprising a main body (12) comprising an underlapping flap (42) that receives the paper roll, and an overlapping flap/lid (40) that closes over the underlapping flap (see [0016] and figure 1). Dieter further discloses overlapping flap/lid (40) comprises a pair of webbing including fasteners, i.e. hooks/carabiners (30 and 32) for attaching the container to an external structure (see figure 1 and [0015]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wiese having a pair of webbings with fasteners as taught by Dieter for attaching the transport case device to an external structure.
Claim 2
Wiese further discloses the body is comprised of a cylindrical shape (see figure 3).
Claim 4
Wiese further discloses the first fastener is positioned circumferentially around the body (see figure 3 and column 3 lines 36-49).
Claim 6
Wiese further discloses an insert (10) comprised of a flat base member (16) and a cylindrical vertical member (20) that extends from the flat base member (see figure 1).
Claims 10, 11, 13-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiese (US 6,854,596) in view of Dieter (US 2004/0004013) and Rothschild (US 8,573,373).
Claims 10, 14, 15 and 18
Wiese discloses a paper roll transport case device comprising a body (30) comprised of a lid (32) and an interior space (defined by space where container 20 is fits) (see column 3 lines 30-36); a first fastener comprising a zipper that secures the lid to the body (see column 3 lines 46-52). Wiese further discloses a container (10) used for holding paper rolls in the interior (see column 2 lines 58-66). Wiese also discloses the body comprises a flap that can be open and closed to allow insertion and removal of toilet paper into the container (10) (see column 3 lines 45-49). Wiese does not disclose a second fastener that attaches to the lid. Wiese does not disclose a third fastener positioned on the body. However, Dieter discloses a container for a roll paper comprising a main body (12) comprising an underlapping flap (42) that receives the paper roll, and an overlapping flap/lid (40) that closes over the underlapping flap (see [0016] and figure 1). Dieter further discloses overlapping flap/lid (40) comprises a pair of webbing including fasteners, i.e. hooks/carabiners (30 and 32) for attaching the container to an external structure (see figure 1 and [0015]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wiese having a pair of webbings with fasteners as taught by Dieter for attaching the transport case device to an external structure. Regarding the third fastener, Rothschild discloses a storage container (300) comprising a body (330) and a lid (310) attached to the body by a zipper fastener (defined by combination of zipper teeth 312 and 332) (see figure 7); and a zipper fastener (337) positioned on the body (see figure 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wiese having a zipper running vertically between top and bottom of the body as taught by Rothschild for easy and complete removal of the body from the container.
Claim 11
Wiese further discloses the body is comprised of a cylindrical shape (see figure 3).
Claim 13
Wiese further discloses the first fastener is positioned circumferentially around the body (see figure 3 and column 3 lines 36-49).
Claim 16
Wiese further discloses an insert (10) comprised of a flat base member (16) and a cylindrical vertical member (20) that extends from the flat base member (see figure 1).
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stinson (4,273,392) in view of Beeken (4,615,442) and Han (US 2021/0153630).
Claims 1, 8, 10 and 18
Stinson discloses a paper roll transport case device comprising a body (22) comprised of a lid (24) and an interior space; a fastener/second fastener (26) that attaches to the lid; and a fastener/third fastener (defined by screw 24 in the bottom of the body securing a base 20 to the body 22) position on the body (see figure 3 and column 2 lines 41-45). Stinson does not disclose a first fastener that secures the lid to the body. However, Beeken discloses a receptacle for roll of sheet/tissue paper (see abstract) comprising a body (11) and a lid (12) attached to each other by a fastener/complementary thread (13 and 14) (see column 2 lines 4-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stinson having complementary threads in the body and the lid to prevent inadvertent detachment between the body and the lid. From the argument that Stinson does not discloses a fastener that attaches to the lid, Han discloses a cup comprising a carabiner-style handle (120). Han discloses the carabiner-style allows the user to hang the cup when not in used (see [0019]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stinson having the handle as a carabiner-style handle as taught by Han for hanging the lid when not attached to the body.
Claims 2 and 11
Stinson further discloses the body is comprised of a cylindrical shape (see figure 2).
Claims 4 and 13
After Stinson is modified by Beeken, the fastener/complementary threads will be disposed circumferentially around the body.
Claims 6 and 16
Stinson further discloses an insert (defined by combination of 14 and 16) comprised of a flat base member (16) and a cylindrical vertical member (14) that extends from the flat base member (see figures 2 and 3).
Claims 3, 9, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiese (US 6,854,596) and Dieter (US 2004/0004013) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rothschild (US 8,573,373); or Wiese (US 6,854,596), Dieter (US 2004/0004013) and Rothschild (US 8,573,373).
Claims 3, 9, 12 and 19
Wiese further discloses the body is made of fabric material (see column 3 lines 66-67). Wiese does not specifically disclose the fabric is waterproof. However, Rothschild discloses a storage container made from nylon, or polyester material (see column 3 lines 40-42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wiese having the body made from a fabric comprising polyester or nylon material as taught by Rothschild for water resistance and/or water repellency of the case device.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stinson (4,273,392) in view of Beeken (4,615,442) and Han (US 2021/0153630) as applied to claims 6 and 16 respectively above, and further in view of Hooser (4,432,451).
Stinson further discloses the cylindrical vertical member/rod (14) is slightly longer than a height of paper rolls (see column 2 lines 31-32). Stinson does not disclose a bottom surface of the lid is comprised of a receiving area that receives the cylindrical vertical member. However, Hooser discloses a bathroom accessory for storage of paper tissue rolls (see abstract) comprising a plunger/insert (16) including a rod (36) (see figure 1). Hooser further discloses the bathroom accessory comprises a lid (40) with an upraised central section (42) for accommodating a plunger handle of extra length (see column 3 lines 54-56). 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 lid of Stinson having an upraised central section as taught by Hooser for accommodating an extra-long rod in case the tissue rolls are of a larger size/height.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAFAEL A. ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 6pm.
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. Aviles 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.
RAFAEL A. ORTIZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3736
/RAFAEL A ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736