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 .
This Office Action acknowledges the applicant’s preliminary amendment filed on 10/25/2024. Claims 1-5 are pending in the application.
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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HORIO US 2014/0227469 A1 in view of Oinuma et al. US 5,706,951 and further in view of Bradford US 8,789,320 B1.
PNG
media_image1.png
353
481
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 1, HORIO discloses a packaging unit that packs storing objects, the storing objects 13 being cases storing semiconductor wafers and being arranged in two rows spaced from each other in a width direction and in double deck in a vertical direction in the container, the packaging unit comprising: a lower cushioning material configured to support lower parts of the storing objects in the two rows in a lower deck; middle cushioning materials, each one of the middle cushioning materials being interposed between the storing objects in corresponding one of the two rows in an upper deck and the
PNG
media_image2.png
10
7
media_image2.png
Greyscale
storing objects in corresponding one of the two rows in the lower deck ;upper cushioning materials, each one of the upper cushioning materials being provided on the storing objects in corresponding one of the two rows in the upper deck and configured to hold upper parts of the storing objects in the corresponding one of the two rows; and a vibration absorbing unit 17f provided on a bottommost portion of the container, the vibration absorbing unit being configured to support the lower cushioning material from below, and a center of each of the elastic bodies is outside a centroid of corresponding one of the storing objects with respect to a center of the two rows of the storing objects in planar view, and a distance between the center of each of the elastic bodies (Para. 0046).
HORIO discloses the packaging unit that packs storing objects but it does not specifically disclose it is packed into a box-shaped container.
However, Oinuma teaches that it was known in the art to have a packaging unit 2/3/4 that packs storing objects into a box-shaped container 1. (Col 5:43-58)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the packaging unit in HORIO by providing a box-shaped container as taught by Oinuma for the purposes of providing more protection to the units during transport.
HORIO discloses a vibration absorption unit 17f but it does not specifically disclose it comprises: a first flat plate; a second flat plate provided below the first flat plate to be parallel to the first flat plate; and elastic bodies interposed between the first flat plate and the second flat plate, the number of the elastic bodies being the same as the number of the storing objects in each of the decks, and a center of each of the elastic bodies is outside a centroid of corresponding one of the storing objects with respect to a center of the two rows of the storing objects in planar view, and a distance between the center of each of the elastic bodies.
However, Bradford teaches that it was known in the art to have a vibration absorption unit it comprise: a first flat plate 1; a second flat plate 2 provided below the first flat plate to be parallel to the first flat plate; and elastic bodies 3 interposed between the first flat plate and the second flat plate.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vibration absorption unit in HORIO by providing a first flat plate 1; a second flat plate 2 provided below the first flat plate to be parallel to the first flat plate; and elastic bodies 3 interposed between the first flat plate and the second flat plate as taught by Bradford for the purposes of preventing the articles from mechanical damage during transport.
HORIO discloses the centering of the vibration absorption units with regards to the packaging units but it does not specifically disclose the centroid of the corresponding one of the storing objects in the width direction is in a range from 2% to 8% of a maximum outer diameter of each of the elastic bodies.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the centroid of the corresponding one of the storing objects in the width direction in a range from 2% to 8% of a maximum outer diameter of each of the elastic bodies, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With regards to claim 2, HORIO does not specifically disclose a ratio Gy/Gx of Gy to Gx is in a range from 1 to 1.3, where Gx is a gap between centers of the elastic bodies adjoining in a row direction and Gy is a gap between centers of the elastic bodies adjoining in a width direction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the ratio Gy/Gx of Gy to Gx be in a range from 1 to 1.3, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With regards to claim 3, HORIO does not specifically disclose a bending strength of the first flat plate is twice to thrice as large as a bending strength of the second flat plate.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the first flat plate twice to thrice as large as a bending strength of the second flat plate, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
With regards to claim 4, Bradford further teaches a cut 4 is formed at least in the first flat plate, of the first flat plate and the second flat plate.
With regards to claim 5, Oinuma discloses a transportation container 1 comprising: the packaging unit according to claim 1; and a box-shaped container configured to house the packaging unit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENINE SPICER whose telephone number is (313)446-4924. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm, Monday-Thursday.
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, Orlando E. Avilés can be reached at (571) 270-5531. 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.
/JENINE SPICER/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
/ORLANDO E AVILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3736