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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in South Korea on 9/20/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR10-2023-0125249 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the mounting protrusion protrudes further outward compared to the flange (claim 2) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim 2 is 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.
The term “and the mounting protrusion protrudes further outward compared to the flange” in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “wherein an outwardly protruding flange is formed on an upper end of the inner container, and the mounting protrusion protrudes further outward compared to the flange” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Is this stating that the mounting protrusion protrudes further outward from the flange in an unmounted state? For either the unmounted and mounted configurations, this is not clearly depicted in any of the figures (figure 4 or 6). Specifically, for figure 6 in the mounted position, the mounting protrusion cannot protrude outward than the flange or it could impact threading. So this limitation does not seem to apply to the mounted position. For figure 4, the application shows mounting protrusions that appear to be in line with the flange. For the purposes of examination, it is assumed that the unmounted configuration is being described.
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 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by KR20220002468U, hereafter referred to as “Reference 1”.
With respect to claim 1, Reference 1 discloses a refillable container comprising: an outer container (10) having a coupling protrusion (12); and an inner container (20) configured to be inserted into the outer container and separably coupled to the coupling protrusion (12), wherein the coupling protrusion (12) comprises a mounting indentation (12b) and a detent hole (12c), the mounting indentation (12b) having an open top and having a particular depth, the detent hole (12c) formed below the mounting indentation with a particular distance in-between, and the inner container comprises a mounting protrusion (protrusion above 34) and a detent hook (34), the mounting protrusion configured to be inserted into the mounting indentation, the detent hook configured to be inserted into the detent hole .
PNG
media_image1.png
420
300
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 3, Reference 1 discloses the refillable container of claim 1, wherein the detent hook (34) is formed on an end portion of a detent piece (34 and relative area), and the detent piece is separated by a particular distance from an outer periphery of the inner container.
With respect to claim 4, Reference 1 discloses the refillable container of claim 3, wherein an outwardly protruding flange (32) is formed on an upper end of the inner container, and the detent piece (34 and relative area) is formed on a lower portion of the flange.
With respect to claim 5, Reference 1 discloses the refillable container of claim 1, wherein a lower end of the mounting protrusion is rounded (protrusion above 34).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR20220002468U, hereafter referred to as “Reference 1” in view of Chadima (US 20080054059 A1).
With respect to claim 2, Reference 1 discloses wherein an outwardly protruding flange (32) is formed on an upper end of the inner container. Reference 1 failed to disclose wherein the mounting protrusion protrudes further outward compared to the flange. However, in a similar field of endeavor, namely containers with latches, Chadima taught of a container with a latching system in which a latch (202) is angled outwards from its respective flange. The respective angling allows for an outward force to constantly be applied to the outer container when in the secured position (pages 4-5 [0045] ). It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the mounting protrusion of Reference 1 to extend out (be angled) further than the flange as taught by Chadima in order to allow for a securement force to exist between the coupling protrusion and the inner container.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. KR-20220002468-U OR KR-20240017587-A OR KR-20240017586-A OR JP-H0680630-U OR JP-2588201-Y2 OR KR-20240017461-A OR EP-4298953-A1 OR US-20080054059-A1
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYMREN K SANGHERA whose telephone number is (571)272-5305. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached on (571)272-4561. 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.
/S.K.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/ERNESTO A GRANO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735