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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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(s) 1 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Morris et al. (US 2,758,723).
Regarding claim 1, Morris discloses a bottle topper comprising: a top portion (11), the top portion having an opening (14) therein and extending between a front side and a back side, the opening sized to receive a top of a bottle; and a bottom portion (10) capable of holding a packet, the bottom portion having a first slot (17 - top/bottom, 18 - top/bottom or 21) to receive a first end of the packet and a second slot (17 - top/bottom, 18 - top/bottom or 21) to receive a second end of the packet, the first slot and the second slot are separated from each other along a length of the bottom portion. See Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 4, the opening is a circle. See Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 5, scored portions (15) are around at least a portion of the opening. See Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 6, a fold line (at 10) separates the top portion from the bottom portion. See Figs. 1-2.
Regarding claim 7, the top portion has a curved portion (at 11) along a portion of an outside surface thereof. See Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 8, the slots are straight, at least along the length direction and top and bottom of 17. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 9, the slots are other than straight, at least along a width direction. See Fig. 3.
Regarding claim 10, a packet has one end in each of the first slot and the second slot. See Fig. 2.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morris as applied above in further view of Patton (US 2020/0283210).
Regarding claims 2 and 11, Morris does not disclose a water bottle. Patton, which is drawn to a bottle topper, discloses the bottle being a water bottle. See [0085].
Thus, it 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 to have the topper of Morris be attached to a water bottle, as disclosed by Patton, in order to attach items that may go along with water.
Regarding claim 3, Morris does not disclose a non-circle as claimed. Patton discloses an opening (26) that is not a circle. See Fig. 1. Thus, it 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 to have the opening of Morris not be a circle, as disclosed by Patton, in order to better the topper to various shaped bottles. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the opening be not be a circle, since there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent. See Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEREK J BATTISTI whose telephone number is (571)270-5709. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm M-F.
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 Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/DEREK J BATTISTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734