DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/4/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the sleeve portion" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the cap" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "the nozzle portion" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the nozzle" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Ransom (U.S. Patent No. 11174073).
Regarding Claim 15, Ransom discloses an insulated apparatus for a viscous fluid 10 (Figure 1), comprising: a first layer of microwavable material formed in a cylinder shape 20 (Figure 2; Column 2, lines 35-39) and having a cavity (Figure 3, opening 22 leads into the cavity) to house the viscous fluid, wherein the first layer has a first end and a second end defining a length of the cylinder with a sidewall having an outer surface forming a container portion (Figure 2); a second layer 12 (Figure 2) wrapped around the outer surface of the first layer forming a sleeve to the container portion (Figure 1); a third layer 50 (figure 2) positioned onto at least a portion of the first layer or second layer (Figure 1), wherein the third layer is made of a material for enhancing grip 50 (Figure 2, column 5, lines 21-23); wherein the first layer has an opening 22 (figure 2) for delivering the viscous fluid from within the cavity (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 16, Ransom discloses the sleeve is configured to extend from a bottom end of the cylinder to a top end of the cylinder (Figure 1), wherein the sleeve is configured to keep the viscous fluid at a constant temperature for a determined period of time within the container portion (Figure 1; capable of keeping a constant temperature due to the added layer).
Regarding Claim 17, Ransom discloses the sleeve portion is configured to be removably coupled to the container portion (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 18, Ransom discloses the third layer is configured to be removably coupled to a bottom end of the sleeve (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 19, Ransom discloses the first layer is made of a flexible material capable of being compressed or squeezed by a user (Column 2, lines 35-39).
Regarding Claim 20, Ransom discloses the second layer is made of a flexible material capable of being compressed or squeezed by a user (column 5, lines 6-8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 21 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ransom (U.S. Patent No. 11174073) in view of Ma (U.S. Pub. No. 20080006643).
Regarding Claim 21, Ransom teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the third layer has a higher coefficient of friction against a surface than the second layer. However, Ma teaches the third layer has a higher coefficient of friction against a surface than the second layer (paragraph 32). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ransom to include the above, as taught by Ma, in order to provide a strong grip on the bottom.
Claim 22 and 23 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ransom (U.S. Patent No. 11174073) in view of Ma (U.S. Pub. No. 20080006643) and Gray (U.S. Patent No. 5607003).
Regarding Claim 22, Ransom and Ma teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for a cap portion, comprising: a coupling means to the first end of the container portion, a first nozzle portion extending from a top end of the cap and having an aperture formed therethrough to allow the viscous fluid to flow from the cavity to an external environment, and a first nozzle cover portion having a first end and a second end configured to be removably coupled to the nozzle portion. However, Gray teaches a cap portion 5 (figure 1), comprising: a coupling means 21 (figure 8) to the first end of the container portion, a first nozzle portion 8 (figure 1) extending from a top end of the cap and having an aperture 13 (figure 1) formed therethrough to allow the viscous fluid to flow from the cavity to an external environment, and a first nozzle cover portion 12 (figure 1) having a first end and a second end configured to be removably coupled to the nozzle portion. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ransom and Ma to include the above, as taught by Gray, in order to provide an easy way of dispending and sealing the container.
Regarding Claim 23, Gray teaches a second nozzle cover 15 (figure 1) having a first end and a second end (Figure 1), wherein the second nozzle cover is configured to couple to the nozzle portion of the cap portion (Figure 2).
Claim 22-25 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ransom (U.S. Patent No. 11174073) in view of Ma (U.S. Pub. No. 20080006643) and Klotz (U.S. Patent No. 5549227).
Regarding Claim 22, Ransom and Ma teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for a cap portion, comprising: a coupling means to the first end of the container portion, a first nozzle portion extending from a top end of the cap and having an aperture formed therethrough to allow the viscous fluid to flow from the cavity to an external environment, and a first nozzle cover portion having a first end and a second end configured to be removably coupled to the nozzle portion. However, Klotz teaches a cap portion 10 (figure 1), comprising: a coupling means 38 (figure 1) to the first end of the container portion, a first nozzle portion 30 (Figure 1) extending from a top end of the cap (Figure 1) and having an aperture 37 (Figure 1) formed therethrough to allow the viscous fluid to flow from the cavity to an external environment (Figure 1), and a first nozzle cover portion 60 (Figure 1) having a first end and a second end configured to be removably coupled to the nozzle portion (Figure 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ransom and Ma to include the above, as taught by Klotz, in order to provide an easy way of dispending and sealing the container.
Regarding Claim 23, Klotz teaches a second nozzle cover 11 (Figure 1) having a first end and a second end (Figure 1), wherein the second nozzle cover is configured to couple to the nozzle portion of the cap portion (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 24, Klotz teaches the first nozzle cover is configured to couple to the second nozzle cover (figure 2), wherein the second nozzle cover is nested within the interior space of the first nozzle cover (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 25, Klotz teaches the second nozzle cover includes a plurality of apertures 52 (Figure 1) formed at the second end of the second nozzle cover (Figure 1), wherein the plurality of apertures are configured to disperse the contents of the container portion at a wider angle of dispersion than the opening of the nozzle (Figure 2).
Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 II(A), MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J VOLZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm 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 at (571)270-5055. 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.
/ELIZABETH J VOLZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3733