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 .
Detailed Action
The preliminary amendment filed on 10/28/2024 has been entered.
Drawing Objection
The drawings are objected to because:
(1) Reference numeral “403” has been used to designate different elements as “a recess” (see Figs.4-5) and “a third portion” (see Figs.9-11).
(2) In Fig.11, it appears reference numerals “401” and “402” should read --402---and --401--, respectively. Note Figs.9 and 10.
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.
Objection to the Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) In paragraph [0133], lines 1 and 3, “210” should read --600--.
(2) In paragraph [0133], line 2, “box 100 cutter” should read --box cutter 600--.
(3) In paragraph [0133], line 10, reference numeral “501” is not found in Fig.6.
(4) In paragraph [0137], line 2, “first portion 501” should read --first portion 401--.
(5) In paragraph [0138], line 1, “puncturing edge 501” should read --puncturing edge 502--. Also, “second portion 402 is further provided with a puncturing edge”, at line 1 of the paragraph, does not agree with Fig.9. As shown in the figure, it is the first portion 401 not the second portion 402 that has a puncturing edge 502.
(6) In paragraph [0138], line 5, “the both cutting edges 501” should read --both cutting edges 501--.
(7) In paragraph [0140] does not agree with Figs.9 and 10. From the figures, it does not appear the first portion 403 is arranged between the first portion 401 and the second portion 402, and the third portion 403 does not appear to be connected to the second portion 402 through a connecting element 414.
(8) In paragraph [0141], lines 9-10, “puncturing device 502” should read --puncturing edge 502--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objection
Claims 8-20 and are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) At line 1 of claim 8 and line 3 of claim 11, “adhesive tape” should read --an adhesive tape--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejection - 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
1. 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.
2. Claims 12, 13, 20, 26 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
(1) A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claims 12, 13 and 20 recite the broad recitations and also the narrower statement of the range/limitation.
The claims are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
(2) In claims 12, 13 and 20, “preferably” is indefinite.
(3) Regarding claims 12, 13 and 20, the phrase "for example" renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
(4) The term “about” in claims 12 and 13 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” 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.
(5) In claim 20, line 2, “the second portion comprises two of cutting edges” contradicts Fig.9 and paragraph [0137], lines 1-2 of the specification. As shown in the figures, it is the first portion 401 not the second portion 402 comprising two cutting edges 501. It is suggested “a cutting edge”, at line 11 of claim 11, be changed to --at least one cutting edge--. Also, it is suggested “the second portion comprises two of cutting edges”, cited at line 2 of claim 20, be changed to --the at least one cutting edge comprises two cutting edges--.
(6) In claim 20, line 9, “second portion 402 is further provided with a puncturing edge” foes not agree with Fig.9. As shown in the figure, it is the first portion 401 not the second portion 402 that has a puncturing edge 502.
(7) In claim 20, line 12, “the cutting edge” lacks clear antecedent basis.
(8) In claim 26, lines 12-14, “the adhesive tape” and “the tape plane” have no antecedent basis.
Claim Rejection - 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)
1. 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.
2. Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 20-0492607 (cited in the PTO-892 with English translation enclosed with this instant Office action).
Regarding claim 1, KR ‘607 discloses a method for attaching a box cutter (10) to a box (B), the method comprising the steps of:
arranging the box cutter (10) on an outer surface of the box (B);
attaching the box cutter (10) to the outer surface (see Fig.4).
Regarding claim 2, in KR ‘607, the step of attaching the box cutter (10) to the outer surface comprises the step of gluing (by means of the adhesive sheet 20) the box cutter (10) to the outer surface.
Regarding claim 4, in KR ‘607, the step of attaching the box cutter (10) to the outer surface comprises the steps of: arranging a sheet (20) at least partly over the box cutter (10); attaching the sheet (20) to the box (10).
Regarding claim 5, in KR ‘607, the sheet (20 has a transparent portion (see page 4, lines 20-21 of the English translation), wherein the step of arranging the sheet (20) over the box cutter (10) comprises the step of arranging the transparent portion over at least part of the box cutter (10) to allow the box cutter (10) to be visible through the sheet (20).
Regarding claim 8, KR ‘607 discloses a method for opening a box (B) closed with an adhesive tape (T), wherein a box cutter (10) is attached to the box (B) according to method of claim 4, the method comprising the steps of: at least partially removing the sheet (20) from the box cutter (10) to gain access to the box cutter (10); removing the box cutter (10) from the outer surface of the box (B); cutting the adhesive tape (T) with the box cutter (10, see Fig.3).
Regarding claim 9, in KR ‘607, the sheet (20) has a pull tab (e.g., “one edge region” without coated with an adhesive material, see page 4, lines 11-12 of the English translation) for removing the sheet (20) from the box (B), wherein the step of at least partly removing the sheet (20) from the box cutter (10) comprises pulling the pull tab.
Claim Rejection - 35 U.S.C. 103
1. 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.
2. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20-0492607 in view of Chang (U.S. Patent No. 3,623,632).
Regarding claim 3, the method of KR ‘607 as set forth shows all the claimed limitations except for the step of providing a depression.
Chang teaches it is desirable to provide an outer surface (13) of a box (10, see Fig.1) with a depression (26, see Fig.3) so that an implement (17) can be arranged in the depression (26) entirely without any part of the implement (17) projecting beyond the outer surface (13) of the box (10).
In view of Chang’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify KR ‘607 by including the step of providing a depression for the advantage set forth.
Indication of Allowable Subject Matter
1. Claims 10, 11 and 14-19 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.
2. Claims 12, 13, 20, 26 and 27 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
3. Claims 10, 11 and 26 and all their dependent claims contain allowable subject matter. The most relevant prior art of record is KR 20-0492607 (note the above rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 103). However, there is no teaching or motivation to modify KR ‘607 by bending the box cutter (see Fig.5) into a substantially three-dimensional state as required by claim 10 or having the box cutter possessed the specifically claimed structure as required by claims 11 and 26.
Prior Art Citations
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 3,828,999 is cited to show an implement (see Fig.3) in a substantially two-dimensional state and bent into a substantially three-dimensional state (see Fig.1) prior to use relevant to claims 10, 11 and 26.
KR 20-2016-0004494 shows a box cutter (100) removably attached to a box (1, see Fig.4) by an adhesive (30, see Fig.1), and upon removing from the box (1), can be used for cutting an adhesive tape (2) off the box (1, see Fig.5).
FR-2944510 is cited to show a box (300, see Fig.2) having a depression (310) formed on an outer surface thereof for receiving a utensil (340) which can be sealed therein by a label (200) with a pull tab (220) that can be pulled to remove the label (200) and gain access to the utensil (340).
Point of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HWEI-SIU PAYER whose telephone number is (571)272-4511. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Boyer Ashley can be reached at telephone number 571-272-4502. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/HWEI-SIU C PAYER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights