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
Claims 9-10 stand withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 § 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 and 4-6 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, wherein the anti-slip ribs comprise an inner face that is configured to contact the replaceable inner bottle (“configured to contact …” is functional language and the anti-slip ribs have the capacity to perform the contact function, for example, with an inner bottle of wider diameter. 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 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).
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-6 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) and Hess (US 2607509).
This rejection is made if it should be deemed that the “configured to contact …” limitation is a positive limitation or that this functional limitation is not properly met.
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 (1) the edge-pressing ring and a cap that covers the top opening of the outer bottle and (2) that the inner face of the anti-slip rib is not configured to contact the inner 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.
Hess teaches an arrangement with an inner container 10 being held by an outer container 1, the outer container has corrugations with the inner side of the walls having inwardly and axially extending ribs, each with an inner face which contacts the inner container as shown in Fig. 1 and 3. 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 containers such that the inner face of the anti-slip ribs contact the inner bottle to stabilize the inner bottle to prevent sound and feel of inner bottle movement when the inner bottle is placed within the outer bottle.
Re claim 2, the anti-slip ribs are arranged 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).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner in view of Jung and Hess 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) 7-8, 11, 13-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner in view of Jung and Hess 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 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.
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, Hess 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the proposed modifications of the obviousness rejection would destroy the function of the primary reference. The rejection of Connor in view of Jung proposes two modifications (1) to add the edge pressing ring, (2) to increase the cap’s outer diameter and (3) aligning the cap, cap sealing assembly, inner bottle’s edge-pressing ring and outer bottle upper edge. These modifications would not destroy the functions of the primary reference of Connor. The modifications do not destroy the interengaging and interlocking means to prevent rotation (preventing rotation of the inner member with respect to the outer member) that is discussed within Connor. The modifications do not remove any of the interlocking parts and the interlocking function is preserved with the modification. In Connor, the interlock prevents rotation of the inner member with respect to the outer member when torque is applied during threading of the cap to the inner member. If the modification applies the torque when threading the cap to the outer member instead of the inner member, this doesn’t destroy the cosmetic jar. The utility of the interlock to prevent rotation is still necessary as the cosmetic jar is handled because the inner member might rotate within the outer member if the interlock is removed. This would make sound or make the construction of the cosmetic jar feel flimsy or loose.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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
Prosecution Insights