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
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A, figures 1-2, claims 1-6, 8-9, 12, 17-19, 21, 23, 26, 29-33 in the reply filed on 10/22/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “Office Action has not shown any serious burden to search and/or examine the claims in the alleged species”. This is not found persuasive because, as stated in the restriction requirement, applicant must submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case, which the applicant has not provided. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Applicant includes a two pair of tabs with a total of four tabs and then includes a third tab for a total of four tabs in claim 26. Applicant fails to provide the above relationships such as a total of five tabs and as to how they interact.
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 18 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.
In claim 18 Applicant provides an engaging panel and Applicant has already provided and engaging panel in claim 1 from which Applicant’s claim depends. Applicant has failed to make clear as to whether the structure is the same or different. Applicant should use proper “said” language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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) 1-6, 8-9, 12, 17-18, 21, 23, 26, 29-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Sutherland (5407065).
Sutherland discloses structure in an engaging panel/blank (elements adjacent “20” in engaging panel 16), tabs (20a, (elements with 20 and 22), aperture (such as aperture that the intended content protrude through in fig 1), first pair of tabs (as shown in the below figure, and equivalent structure at the corners), separation element extending toward a corner (as shown in the below figure, and equivalent structure at the corners), intersection of a first fold line connected to and end panel (such as adjacent 28 with panel below 28 in fig 2, and equivalent structure at the other tabs) and second fold line connected to a side panel (such as adjacent 30 with panel to the left of 30 in fig 2, and equivalent structure at the other tabs), barrier element (as shown in below figure and equivalent structure at corners; element is a cut as shown in fig 2, 3); barrier extends perpendicular to separation element (fig 2), barrier defines a portion of side of tabs (as in fig 2); barrier extends obliquely (as in fig 2, 3); triangular corner portion coupling end and side (shape and relationship shown in fig 2); separation element is a first cutline (as in fig 2, 3 where a notional line is collinear to the corner as shown in fig 2); hinged connection with side and end coincident with fold lines (as shown in fig 1 with activated hinged); second pair of tabs with second cutline, where one of pair is opposite a first of the first pair and a second is opposite a second of the first (as shown below figure); pair of asymmetrical tabs with cutline (such as at second pair of tabs and second cutline in below figure, with notional imaginary line through aperture, as shown in fig 1).
With respect an additional third tab between a pair of tabs, the Office notes that Official Notice is taken, that it is old and conventional to provide the above and all of claim 26. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made in view of the Official Notice to provide the above and all of claim 26 order to additional structure to adapt to particular shape of the intended contents, thereby securely holding the above structure in place.
With respect an additional third tab between a pair of tabs, the Office notes that Official Notice is taken, that it is old and conventional to provide the above and all of claim 26. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made in view of the Official Notice to provide the above and all of claim 26 order to additional structure to adapt to particular shape of the intended contents, thereby securely holding the above structure in place.
With respect a joint flap with no direct connection to end and fold line in registry with another fold line with an upper portion secured to another upper portion and the flap is frangible connected and face contacting, the Office notes that Official Notice is taken, that it is old and conventional to provide the above and all of claims 29-30. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made in view of the Official Notice to provide the above and all of claims 29-20 order to additional structure to adapt to particular shape of the intended contents, thereby securely holding the above structure in place, while also providing an enclosed corner structure about the intended contents to further protect the intended contents.
PNG
media_image1.png
813
605
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claim19 is potentially objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW D PERREAULT whose telephone number is (571)270-5427. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-5:30pm.
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 at (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.
/ANDREW D PERREAULT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735