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 .
This action is written in response to the amendment filed 05/04/2026
Claims 1-14 are presented for examination
This action is Final
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1, 4, 6-8 and 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Draghetti (WO 2019/229212) in view of Bojie (US 10,889,405).
Claims 1, 4. Draghetti discloses a spacing support 11 for packs 100 for rod-shaped articles, the spacing support comprising a pair of side walls 15 extending from a bottom wall, thereby forming a housing for supporting and accommodating a plurality of packs arranged in two adjacent rows (fig. 7), the housing comprising an access aperture 17 through which the packs may be introduced into and extracted from the housing;
wherein at least one of the side walls comprises a plurality of positioning elements 18 projecting towards the an inside of the housing,
wherein the positioning elements are configured to delimit positioning sections in which the packs may be held (pg. 10, ll. 1-26); and
wherein positioning elements of the plurality of positioning elements are formed in a shape (fig. 9).
Draghetti fails to disclose a single strip formation of the positioning elements. Bojie represents evidence wherein the positioning elements 11B, 12B are made as one predefined strip connected with the at least one of the side walls 11/12 and a further wall of the housing (fig. 1, 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the positioning element of Draghetti to include the single wall attached positioning element of Bojie assist in maintaining both the structural integrity of the support and the stored objects.
It is noted that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the “V” into a “Z” shape, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) MPEP 214.04 IV B
Claim 6. Draghetti-Bojie discloses the spacing support according to claim 1, wherein the longitudinal ends of the predefined strips are formed integrally with the at least one side wall or the further wall of the spacing support (Draghetti; pg. 10).
Claim 7. Draghetti-Bojie discloses the spacing support according to claim 1, wherein both of the side walls of the housing comprise a plurality of positioning elements, and wherein each of the plurality of positioning element is made as one predefined strip connected with the respective one of two side walls and the further wall of the housing (Draghetti; fig. 2).
Claim 8. Draghetti-Bojie discloses the spacing support according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of positioning element projects inwards and extends into the housing less than half of a width of the bottom wall (Draghetti; fig. 4),
wherein the width of the bottom wall extends perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the housing (Draghetti; fig. 2, 3a).
Claim 11. Draghetti-Bojie discloses a container for packs for rod-shaped articles comprising a body accommodating a spacing support according to claim 1 and a plurality of packs for rod-shaped articles accommodated in the spacing support (Draghetti; abstract).
Claim 12. Draghetti-Bojie discloses the container according to claim 11, wherein the positioning elements of the spacing support forms positioning sections along the longitudinal direction of the housing in which positioning section a pack is held (Draghetti; fig. 8),
wherein the positioning elements are arranged at a fixed distance, which distance is greater than a size of the packs measured along the longitudinal direction of the housing (Draghetti fig. 9).
Claim 13. Draghetti-Bojie discloses the container according to claim 11, wherein a top wall of the packs projects beyond a top edge of the side walls of the spacing support at the access aperture (Draghetti; fig. 2).
Claim 15. Draghetti-Bojie discloses spacing support according to claim 1, wherein the at least one side wall 11 and the bottom wall 13B are connected to each other by a wall folding line 3A, and wherein each predefined strip 11B extends from the at least one side wall to the bottom wall across the wall folding line (Bojie; fig. 2, 4).
Claim 16. Draghetti-Bojie discloses spacing support according to claim 1, wherein each positioning element of the plurality of positioning elements is formed by a respective predefined strip, and wherein the respective predefined strips are spaced apart from one another along a longitudinal direction of the housing (Draghetti; fig. 2, 4).
Claim(s) 2-3, 5 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Draghetti (WO 2019/229212) in view of Bojie (US 10,889,405) in view of Omori et al. (US 5,687,874).
Claim 2. Draghetti-Bojie discloses the spacing support according to claim 1, but fails to disclose strips connected at both longitudinal ends. Omori teaches wherein the predefined strips 2 are connected with the spacing support at both of their longitudinal ends (col. 1, ll. 62-67; col. 2, ll. 1-10; fig. 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the connecting configuration of Draghetti to include the configuration of Omori to assist in creating a more stable strip and product connection.
Claim 3. Draghetti-Bojie-Omori discloses the spacing support according to claim 2, wherein one end of the longitudinal ends of the predefined strips is connected with the at least one side wall of the housing and another end of the longitudinal ends is connected with the bottom wall of the housing (Omori; fig.3a, 6).
Claim 5. Draghetti-Bojie discloses the spacing support according to claim 1, but fails to disclose an asymmetrical positioning element. Omori teaches wherein the Z-shaped positioning elements are asymmetric,
wherein a first section and a last section of three sections forming the Z-shaped positioning element, have different lengths (fig. 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the positioning element shape of Draghetti to include the asymmetrical positioning element of Omori to assist in accommodating objects of varying sizes and shapes.
Claim 9. Draghetti-Bojie-Omori discloses the spacing support according to claim 2, wherein the housing comprises two compartments arranged adjacent to each other, each compartment for accommodating one of the two rows of packs (Draghetti; fig. 7),
wherein each compartment is formed by a pair of side walls extending from a portion of the bottom wall, wherein a side wall of each pair of side walls comprises a plurality of positioning elements (Draghetti; fig. 9).
Claim 10. Draghetti-Bojie-Omori discloses the spacing support according to claim 9, wherein each one of the longitudinal ends of the predefined strips is connected with the side wall of the pair of side walls of the two compartments comprising the plurality of positioning elements and each other one of the longitudinal ends of the predefined strips is connected with the portion of the bottom wall of each compartment (Omori; 1-2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-19 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 1. Applicant’s specification references the “further wall” as a bottom wall, a middle wall or a sidewall. While the strips of Draghetti are singular in design and attached to multiple sidewalls, which can be constituted as the further wall, Draghetti fails to disclose one singular strip. Modifying the strips to bodily incorporate the concept of a singular strip would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art and would fail to inhibit the workability of the strips.
Since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. A claim to a fluid transporting vehicle was rejected as obvious over a prior art reference which differed from the prior art in claiming a brake drum integral with a clamping means, whereas the brake disc and clamp of the prior art comprise several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit. The court affirmed the rejection holding, among other reasons, "that the use of a one-piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice, see M.P.E.P. § 2144.04 V(B).
The singular insert of Bojie is attached to a further wall or sidewall (11 and 13B) or (12 and 13B). It is shown in figures 2-3 of Bojie that the slots 30 would delimit the inserted product. The concept of the integral structure is modified with the teachings of Draghetti for the ease or production especially at the fold lines (2A, 3A).
The configuration of the attached insert of Bojie comprises slotted portions (11B sub 3 and 12B sub 3) that extend at a given angle relative to the side and bottom walls to support the inserted product in the specified position. In conjunction with horizontal portions (11B and 12B sub 1), form the portions needed for stability of the insert and the product. Vertical portion (11B and 12B sub 2), although optional, are used to hold the slanted portions (11B sub 3) in place. Modifying the strips of Draghetti with the stabilized insert position of Bojie further optimizes the stability of the overall product. Modifying the configuration into a Z-shape would further maintain the stabilized position of the insert since the slanted portion and base bears the weight needed for stabilizing.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAVEN COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-1672. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm 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, 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.
/RAVEN COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
