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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
At claim 1, line 10: there should be a comma or semicolon after “closure member.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-12 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.
Claim 1 recites “the side of the free end of the neck” in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, this limitation will be interpreted as “a side of a free end of the neck.”
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the end of the screwing” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, this limitation will be interpreted as “an end of the screwing.”
Claim 1 recites “at least one screw thread” in line 11. It is unclear whether this is referring to the “at least one screw thread” already recited at line 4, or a different screw thread. For purposes of examination, this limitation will be interpreted as “the at least one screw thread.”
Claim 1 recites “the side opposite the free end” at line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, this limitation will be interpreted as “a side opposite the free end.”
Claim 3 recites “the halfway point of the height of the thread” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, this limitation will be interpreted as “a halfway point of a height of the thread in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis.”
Claim 4 recites “the container having, at the base of the neck and around the latter, a shoulder, the latter not having a stop” at lines 2-3. It is unclear what is meant by “the latter.” Is this referring to the base, or the neck, or something else? For purposes of examination, this limitation will be interpreted as “the container having a shoulder at a base of the neck, the base of the neck not having a stop.”
Claim 4 recites “the later not having a stop that forms a protrusion with respect to the shoulder and against which the closure member comes to bear at the end of the screwing thereof” in lines 3-5. It is unclear which part of this limitation the “not having” applies to. Does the closure member come to bear against the shoulder? Or does the closure member not have anything to bear against at the shoulder?
Claims 2-12 are also rejected through their dependence on a rejected parent claim (details above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 102017200747 to Schmidt et al. (hereinafter, “Schmidt”).
Regarding claim 1, Schmidt discloses a device (storage device 11, Fig. 1) for packaging a product (para. [0025] of attached translation), having: a container (storage container 12, Fig. 1) for containing the product (para. [0025]), provided with a threaded neck (neck 20, see Figs. 11-12) having a longitudinal axis (vertical axis through container), at least one screw thread (engagement structure 30, Fig. 1) having, on the side of the free end of the neck (top of neck 20), a thread starting point (end surface 22, Fig. 1), and a closure member (applicator 14, Fig. 1) for closing the container (storage container 12) that is arranged to be screwed onto the neck (neck 20), the closure member (applicator 14) having at least one corresponding stop (transition between first and second recess sections 45, 57, Fig. 9; para. [0059]) arranged to come to bear against the thread starting point (end surface 22) at the end of the screwing of the closure member onto the neck of the container (para. [0059]) to block the rotation of the closure member (para. [0059]); at least one screw thread (engagement structure 30) having, on the side opposite the free end of the neck (bottom of the neck 20), a thread end point (see Fig. 2) and having a thread interruption (locking latch 35, Fig. 2) between the thread starting point (end surface 22) and the thread end point (bottom of thread, see Fig. 2), the closure member (applicator 14) having at least one elastically deformable tongue (locking element 34, Figs. 1-2; paras. [0016], [0053]) arranged to engage at least partially in the thread interruption (locking latch 35) during the screwing of the closure member onto the neck of the container (para. [0016]) and generate a tactile sensation and/or the emission of an audible click (para. [0016]).
Regarding claim 4, Schmidt further discloses the container (storage container 12) having, at the base of the neck (neck 20) and around the latter, a shoulder (shoulder 23, Fig. 5), the latter not having a stop that forms a protrusion with respect to the shoulder (see Figs. 1-2) and against which the closure member (applicator 14) comes to bear at the end of the screwing thereof (see Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 5, Schmidt further discloses the container (storage container 12) being made, at least in part, of glass (para. [0026]).
Regarding claim 7, Schmidt further discloses the tongue (locking element 34) being attached to the closure member (applicator 14) by only one of its ends (tongue is attached at radially outer end, see Figs. 7-10).
Regarding claim 8, Schmidt further discloses the tongue (locking element 34) having, on the inside (radially inner side), an upstream flank (leading edge of locking element 34, Fig. 9) and a downstream flank (trailing edge of locking element 34, Fig. 9) that are oriented obliquely in the radial direction (leading edge and trailing edge are spread apart in the radial direction), the upstream flank (leading edge of locking element 34) engaging first in the thread interruption (locking latch 35) during the screwing of the closure member (applicator 14), and the downstream flank last (see e.g., Figs. 1, 9).
Regarding claim 11, Schmidt further discloses the closure member (applicator 14) having a stem holder (recess receiving shaft 46, para. [0048]) to which a stem (shaft 46, Fig. 1) bearing a member (body 50, Fig. 1) for applying the product is fastened (see Fig. 1), the stem (shaft 46) being inserted into the container (storage container 12) when the closure member (applicator 14) is screwed onto the container (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Schmidt further discloses the screwing of the closure member (applicator 14) onto the container (storage container 12) being done in less than one turn around the longitudinal axis of the neck (see Figs. 11-13).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt.
Regarding claim 3, Schmidt appears to discloses the thread interruption (locking latch 35) being situated around the halfway point of the height of the thread (see Fig. 2).
Schmidt does not expressly disclose the thread interruption being situated between the thread starting point and the halfway point of the thread. However, Schmidt teaches that the location of the thread interruption limits the insertion depth of the closure member with the stem holder (paras. [0043], [0052]).
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 device of Schmidt to arrange the thread interruption between the thread starting point and a halfway point of the height of the thread 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 (i.e., the height of the stem holder) involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05, citing In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation (see Specification at p. 3, ll. 22-23).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 6, 9, and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 2 and 6, does not disclose the thread starting point stopping surface that bears against the stop being substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the neck, or the stop surface that bears against the thread starting point extending substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the closure member as claimed. It would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Schmidt to have such an arrangement.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Schmidt does not disclose the closure member having an internally threaded mounting skirt, arranged to be screwed onto the neck, provided with at least one perforation as claimed. It would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Schmidt to have such an arrangement.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Pat. 8,528,759 to Pucci discloses a device comprising a container with a threaded neck and a closure having a tongue that engages with an interruption in the thread (see Figs. 1-31).
U.S. Pub. 2008/0110850 to Tilton discloses a device comprising a container with a threaded neck, an interruption between a thread starting point and a halfway height, and a closure having a tongue that engages with an interruption in the thread to provide audible feedback (see Figs. 1-5).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA E. PARKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6014. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:30 pm 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, 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.
/LAURA E. PARKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Prosecution Insights