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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I: Fig. 1, Embodiment I (claims 1-8 and 11-20) in the reply filed on 12 February 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Office has not demonstrated a serious search and/or examination burden. This is not found persuasive because the specie were restricted/elected under international (lack of unity) rules and not US restriction practice rules. The serious search and/or examination burden test is a US restriction practice rule.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 9-10 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12 February 2026.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 11-20 are 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 1, line 5, the statement “a top opening of the bottle body extends outward to form an edge-pressing ring.” It isn’t the top opening that extends radially outward but rather the upper rim that extends outwardly like a flange to form an edge-pressing ring. The Office suggests stating “an upper rim defining a top opening of the bottle body” and “the upper rim extends outward to form an edge-pressing ring.” Claim 1 is indefinite and inaccurate.
In claim 3, the intent is to claim a pair of fetching grooves. However, this is not clear as a (first) fetching groove is claimed then a pair of fetching grooves is claimed. The metes and bounds of claim 3 are unclear as it could be three total fetching grooves or just the pair of fetching grooves. The Office suggests “further comprising a pair of centrosymmetric, fetching grooves formed in the top of the outer bottle.”
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner (US 2076549) in view of Jung (KR 20200013305) (cited by applicant)(published 2/7/2020).
Conner discloses a replaceable cosmetic jar (use embodiment of Fig. 5-9), comprising a dustproof cap (13), a cap sealing assembly (liner or gasket 14), a replaceable inner bottle (inner member 10), and an outer bottle (outer member 9), wherein the outer bottle is a top-opened jar body; the replaceable inner bottle is placed in the outer bottle; the replaceable inner bottle comprises a bottle body (lower portion of inner member) and a bearing ring (flange 12 on inner member at top of bottle body); the bearing ring is provided at a top of the bottle body; an annular limit groove (annular rabbet 17 on outer member 9) matching the bearing ring is formed in a top of the outer bottle; anti-slip ribs (ribs are the inwardly extending portions between adjacent notches 16) are provided on the annular limit groove. Conner fails to disclose the edge-pressing ring and a cap that covers the top opening of the outer bottle. Jung teaches a similarly configured cosmetic jar with inner and outer bottles in a nested relationship and a cap, the top opening is defined by an upper rim which extends outward to form an edge-pressing ring (see Fig. 2, 3, 6 and 7); a lower edge of the edge-pressing ring is placed at a top opening of the outer bottle (see Fig. 2, 3, 6 and 7); and when the dustproof cap covers the top opening of the outer bottle (see Fig. 2, 3, 6 and 7), the dustproof cap presses an upper edge of the edge-pressing ring through the cap sealing assembly (packing 134, see Fig. 2, 3, 6 and 7) to seal an opening of the replaceable inner bottle. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the top opening and upper rim (1) to add the edge-pressing ring to the top opening and upper rim of the inner bottle, (2) to increase the cap’s outer diameter to cover the top opening of the outer bottle and secure the cap threads to external threads on the outer bottle and (3) to arrange the cap, cap sealing assembly, inner bottle’s edge-pressing ring and outer bottle upper edge in vertical alignment so that the dustproof cap presses an upper edge of the edge-pressing ring through the cap sealing assembly to seal an opening of the replaceable inner bottle as such seal may improve by increasing the surface area at which the cap sealing assembly and the edge-pressing ring contact to provide a tighter, more reliable seal and to decrease the stress at any one point of contact because the surface area of contact has been increased.
Re claim 2, the anti-slip ribs are arranged along an axial direction of the outer bottle; there are a plurality of anti-slip ribs; and the plurality of anti-slip ribs are arranged on an inner wall of the annular limit groove in an annular array.
Re claim 4, the dustproof cap is threaded with the outer bottle.
Re claim 5, when the replaceable inner bottle is not put into the outer bottle for use, the top opening of the replaceable inner bottle is sealed by a sealing film (sealing paper 124 of Jung); and the sealing film hermetically covers the upper edge of the edge-pressing ring. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add the sealing film to keep contents of inner bottle sealed from contamination when sold as a refill and up till the time of first use after being placed into an outer bottle
Re claim 6, an edge of the sealing film extends outward to form a hand tearing portion (124a).
Re claim 8, a cream cosmetic (see “cream” in abstract of Jung and Conner’s jar is “intended primarily for containing cosmetic preparations, including … cold creams,” see page 1, column 1, lines 1-5.) is provided in the replaceable inner bottle; the cap sealing assembly is a cap sealing sheet (packing 134 of Jung is in form of a sheet); the cap sealing sheet is fixedly connected to the dustproof cap; and when the dustproof cap covers the top opening of the outer bottle, the cap sealing sheet presses the upper edge of the edge-pressing ring to seal the opening of the replaceable inner bottle.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner in view of Jung as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Ezzina et al. (US 2023/0147837) (priority to 11/9/2021)(Ezzina).
The combination fails to disclose a pair of fetching grooves. Ezzina teaches a pair of centrosymmetric, fetching grooves (“at least two radially opposed indentations 48, see paragraph [70]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add the pair of centrosymmetric, fetching grooves to the outer bottle to allow a stronger and more comfortable grasp of the inner bottle when separating the inner bottle from the outer bottle.
Claim(s) 7, 11, 13-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner in view of Jung as applied to claims 1, 2 and 4-6 above, and further in view of Soule (US 2013/0306617).
Degradable material is defined by applicant in paragraph [25], lines 4-6 of PG Pub. 2025/0288081 as “a paper material prepared from wood fibers, bamboo fibers, chitin fibers or polylactic acid fibers.”
Re claims 7, 11 and 13-15, the combination fails to disclose the degradable material (as defined by applicant). Soule teaches a tapered paper cup, see paragraph [51], lines 1-3, as the inner bottle (insert container “C” as shown in Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the material of the inner bottle to be a degradable material (paper material) so that the use of multiple, disposable inner bottles doesn’t adversely affect the environment because of a never degradation or a slow degradation.
Re claims 16 and 18-20, Conner’s jar is “intended primarily for containing cosmetic preparations, including … cold creams,” see page 1, column 1, lines 1-5. the cap sealing assembly is a cap sealing sheet (packing 134 of Jung is in form of a sheet); the cap sealing sheet is fixedly connected to the dustproof cap; and when the dustproof cap covers the top opening of the outer bottle, the cap sealing sheet presses the upper edge of the edge-pressing ring to seal the opening of the replaceable inner bottle.
Claim(s) 12 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner in view of Jung and Ezzina as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Soule (US 2013/0306617).
Re claim 12, the combination fails to disclose the degradable material (as defined by applicant). Soule teaches a tapered paper cup, see paragraph [51], lines 1-3, as the inner bottle (insert container “C” as shown in Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the material of the inner bottle to be a degradable material (paper material) so that the use of multiple, disposable inner bottles doesn’t adversely affect the environment because of a never degradation or a slow degradation.
Re claims 17, Conner’s jar is “intended primarily for containing cosmetic preparations, including … cold creams,” see page 1, column 1, lines 1-5. the cap sealing assembly is a cap sealing sheet (packing 134 of Jung is in form of a sheet); the cap sealing sheet is fixedly connected to the dustproof cap; and when the dustproof cap covers the top opening of the outer bottle, the cap sealing sheet presses the upper edge of the edge-pressing ring to seal the opening of the replaceable inner bottle.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN J CASTELLANO whose telephone number is (571)272-4535. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
sjc/STEPHEN J CASTELLANO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733