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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following features:
“cut out” feature of claim 8 and Figs. 30, 32, 36, and 38;
“guide portion” feature of claim 8 and Figs. 30, 32, 36, and 38;
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“silicon valve” should read “silicone valve”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “Squeeze Bottle Dispenser with Metered Dosing” or a variation thereof to at least include an indication of the deformable container and the controlled dosage being implemented.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
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 6-8 and 20 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
Regarding claim 6, the term “groove” in claim 6 is used by the claim to mean “depression, cup, bowl, or detent,” while the accepted meaning is “a long narrow channel” (m-w.com). The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Regarding claim 7, it is unclear which element is being guided while ascending or descending in the phrase “an auxiliary guide portion guiding an ascending and descending of the support column” as the support column of the present invention is understood to be stationary. For purposes of this examination, the phrase will be interpreted as “ascending and descending motion of the inertial member along the support column”.
Regarding claim 8, it is unclear what the shape of the main body as to where the “portion corresponding to the plurality of support columns is cut out”. Based on the drawing of Fig. 32, the cut out forms a longitudinal slot in the cylindrical shell of the main body portion.
Further regarding claim 8, it is unclear as to the location of the guide portion which is “provided on an edge of the closed other side of the main body portion”. Based on the drawing of Fig. 32, the guide portion is formed at the intersection of the cut out and the end wall (“other side of the main body portion”) of the discontinuous cylindrical shell of the main body portion.
Regarding claim 20, it is unclear whether the elements” including the support portion, the inertial member, and the elastic member, that “are integrally formed of one material, are formed from the same material or if each element is formed from a single (and possibly different) material.
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.
Claims 1-6, 10 and 15-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Skillin et al. (US 10159998 B2) hereinafter Skillin.
Regarding claim 1, Skillin discloses a measured dose dispenser comprising the following elements:
an outer cap (Skillin, Fig. 5 closure body 20) fastened to an inlet of
a container (Skillin, Fig. 1 product container 14) capable of increasing internal pressure by an external force and having a nozzle (discharging contents contained in the container (Skillin, col. 1 lines 43-48);
a support portion having a plurality of support columns spaced apart from each other around the nozzle in the outer cap (Skillin, Fig. 5 flow ports 54; Fig 20 flow ports (unnumbered) on measuring reservoir 226);
an inertial member (Skillin, Fig. 20 piston valve 228)
guided by the plurality of support columns (Skillin, Fig. 21 upper portion of measuring reservoir 226),
moving toward the nozzle when the internal pressure of the container increases, and opening and closing the nozzle (Skillin, col. 2 lines 18-26);
and an elastic member pushing the inertial member away from the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 20 spring 230),
wherein a first inflow path is formed by a space between the plurality of support columns in a discharge direction of the nozzle, and wherein the first inflow path is configured to allow the contents to press the inertial member when the internal pressure of the container increases (Skillin, col. 2 lines 18-26).
Regarding claim 2, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 1, wherein
a second flow path is formed by a space between the plurality of support columns in a circumferential direction of the nozzle, and wherein the second flow path allows the contents to flow between the inertial member and the nozzle when the inertial member moves away from the nozzle by the elastic member, or allows the contents to flow into the nozzle by a siphon effect when the inertial member moves toward the nozzle when compressing the elastic member (Skillin, col. 2 lines 32-37).
Regarding claim 3, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 1, wherein
the nozzle includes a discharge port (Skillin, Fig. 6 exit orifice 34) protruding toward an outside of the container
and an inlet (Skillin, Fig. 6 entrance orifice 38) protruding toward an inside of the container,
wherein the inertial member includes a plug portion moving toward the nozzle to contact the inlet and close the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve stem 60),
wherein the plug portion has a shape in which cross-section becomes smaller in a direction toward the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve stem 60),
and wherein the inlet has a shape corresponding to the shape of the plug portion (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve seat 62).
Regarding claim 4, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 3, wherein
a discharge amount of the contents is adjusted by adjusting a distance between the plug portion and the nozzle, and wherein the discharge amount of the contents becomes greater when the distance between the plug portion and the nozzle becomes greater (Skillin, col. 6 lines 10-14).
Regarding claim 5, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 4, wherein
the distance between the plug portion and the nozzle is adjusted according to a length of the plug portion or a length of the plurality of support columns (Skillin, col. 6 lines 10-14).
Regarding claim 6, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 1, wherein the inertial member includes:
a cylindrical main body portion having one side facing the nozzle being open and an other side facing the container being closed (Skillin, Fig. 6 cup-shaped piston valve 28);
a guide portion provided on an outer peripheral surface of the main body portion to correspond to the plurality of support columns (Skillin, Fig. 6 measuring reservoir 26);
a plug portion having a shape in which a cross-section becomes smaller in a direction from the main body portion toward the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve stem 60);
and a groove portion provided on an other side surface of the main body portion and having a shape corresponding to the cross-section of the plug portion (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve stem 60).
Regarding claim 10, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 1,
and includes a stopper provided on an end of at least one of the plurality of support columns facing each other (Skillin, Fig. 6 bottom wall 46),
and prevents the inertial member from disengaging when the inertial member moves away from the nozzle by the elastic member (Skillin, Fig. 6 bottom wall 46).
However, regarding the claim 10 element “wherein the support portion is integrally formed with the outer cap”, MPEP §2144.04(V)(B) recites that making parts integral has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In this instance, Applicant's disclosure does not appear to highlight or explain a new and unexpected result from making the support portion integral with the outer cap. While considered, integrally forming the support portion with the outer cap is not afforded patentable weight in a determination of allowability.
Furthermore, regarding the claim 10 element “and wherein the stopper is implemented in a heat fusion or an injection”, MPEP §2113 recites “the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production”. While considered, implementing the stopper using heat fusion or an injection is not afforded patentable weight in a determination of allowability.
Regarding claim 15, Skillin discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
an outer cap (Skillin, Fig. 5 closure body 20; Fig 20 closure body 220) fastened to an inlet of
a container (Skillin, Fig. 1 product container 14) capable of increasing internal pressure by an external force
and having a nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 4 exit orifice 34) discharging contents contained in the container;
a support portion provided around the nozzle in the outer cap (Skillin, Fig. 5 measuring reservoir 226);
an inertial member moving toward the nozzle when the internal pressure of the container increases, and opening and closing the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 20 piston valve 228);
and an elastic member pushing the inertial member away from the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 20 spring 230),
wherein the support portion includes:
a fourth fastening portion provided on an outer peripheral surface (Skillin, Fig. 7 upper peripheral edge 50) and fastened to the outer cap (Skillin, Fig. 7 mounting rim 52);
and a plurality of inflow paths formed by penetrating the outer peripheral surface at regular intervals in a circumferential direction of the nozzle (Skillin, Fig 21 upper portion of measuring reservoir 226).
Regarding claim 16, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 15,
wherein the outer cap includes: a second fastening portion fastened to a first fastening portion of the container (Skillin Fig. 7 threaded inner skirt 40; threaded neck 18 of product container 14);
and a third fastening portion provided between the second fastening portion and the nozzle and fastened to the fourth fastening portion of the support portion (Skillin Fig. 6 mounting rim 52).
Regarding claim 17, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 15,
wherein the nozzle includes a discharge port protruding toward an outside of the container(Skillin, Fig. 6 exit orifice 34),
and an inlet protruding toward an inside of the container (Skillin, Fig. 6 entrance orifice 38),
wherein the inertial member includes
a plug portion (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve stem 60) moving toward the nozzle to contact the inlet and close the nozzle,
wherein the plug portion has a shape in which a cross-section becomes smaller in a direction toward the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve stem 60),
and wherein the inlet has a shape corresponding to the shape of the plug portion (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve seat 62).
Regarding claim 18, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 15,
wherein the inertial member includes:
a main body portion having a cylindrical shape in which one side facing the nozzle and the other side facing the container are open, the main body portion being divided into a first portion facing the nozzle and a second portion facing the inside of the container (Skillin, Fig. 8 cup-shaped piston valve 28);
a guide portion provided on an inner peripheral surface of the first portion of the main body portion to guide movement of the body portion with respect to the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 8 outer cylindrical shell of cup-shaped piston valve 28);
a plug portion provided in the main body portion between the first portion and the second portion, the plug portion having a shape in which a cross-section becomes smaller in a direction toward the nozzle (Skillin, Fig. 8 cup-shaped piston valve 28);
and a groove portion having a shape corresponding to a cross-section of the plug portion in the second portion (Skillin, Fig. 6 valve stem 60).
Regarding claim 19, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 15,
wherein the plurality of inflow paths of the support portion is configured to allow the contents to be introduced into the first portion when the inertial member moves away from the nozzle by the elastic member (Skillin paragraph [006] lines 5-10),
or the contents to be transferred to the nozzle by a siphon effect when the inertial member moves toward the nozzle while compressing the elastic member (Skillin paragraph [006] lines 5-10).
Regarding claim 20, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 15,
wherein the support portion, the inertial member, and the elastic member are integrally formed of one material.
However, MPEP §2144.04 recites that making a part integral has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In this instance, Applicant's disclosure does not appear to highlight or explain a new and unexpected result from integrally forming the support portion, the inertial member, and the elastic member. While considered, the integrally forming support portion, the inertial member, and the elastic member are not afforded patentable weight in a determination of allowability.
Regarding claim 21, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 20,
wherein the elastic member is provided on an outer periphery of the inertial member, and one end of the elastic member is connected to the support portion and an other end is connected to the inertial member (Skillin, Fig. 6 spring 30).
Regarding claim 22, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
A dispensing apparatus comprising: the dispenser of claim 1;
and a container mounted to the dispenser (Skillin, Fig. 1 product container 1).
Regarding claim 23, Skillin further discloses a dispenser with the following elements:
The dispensing apparatus according to claim 22,
including contents contained in the container (Skillin, col. 1 lines 28-33)
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.
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skillin in view of Pouliaude (US 2014/0124538 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Skillin discloses the dispenser of claim 6:
The dispenser according to claim 6,
And a groove on a side facing the container (Skillin Fig. 5, measuring reservoir).
As stated above, Skillin discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including all of the elements of claim 6 of the current invention except for the following elements:
wherein the inertial member further includes at least one of an auxiliary guide portion guiding an ascending and descending of the support column,
and a protrusion increasing a surface area to which the contents press when the internal pressure of the container increases,
wherein the auxiliary guide portion has a rod shape extending in a longitudinal direction of the support column in the guide portion,
and wherein the protrusion protrudes from the outer peripheral surface of the main body portion,
on which Skillin is silent.
Pouliaude (US 20140124538 A1) teaches the following elements:
wherein the inertial member further includes at least one of an auxiliary guide portion guiding an ascending and descending of the support column (Pouliaude, Fig. 3 guide tabs 71),
and a protrusion increasing a surface area to which the contents press when the internal pressure of the container increases (Pouliaude, Fig. 3 guide tabs 71),
wherein the auxiliary guide portion has a rod shape extending in a longitudinal direction of the support column in the guide portion (Pouliaude, Fig. 4 guide spines 13),
and wherein the protrusion protrudes from the outer peripheral surface of the main body portion (Pouliaude, Fig. 3 guide tabs 71),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of dispensing before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the disclosures of the dispenser and groove of Skillin, with the auxiliary guide portion and protrusion in the teachings of Pouliaude to provide an efficient guide path for the piston valve or inertial element during its motion while dispensing from or refilling the dispensing chamber.
Regarding claim 9, the modified device of Skillin in view of Pouliaude as applied to claim 7 teaches the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 7,
wherein the plurality of support columns are formed of four columns by providing one at each vertex of a rectangle (Skillin, col. 1 lines 55-58 “plurality of flow ports”; )
or formed of three columns by providing one at each vertex of a triangle (Skillin, Fig. 5 three flow ports shown with three columns in between).
Therefore, the modified device of Skillin in view of Pouliaude as applied to claim 7, through Skillin teaches the invention of claim 9.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skillin in view of Gross et al. (US 6290108 B1).
Regarding claim 13, Skillin discloses the following elements:
The dispenser according to claim 1, further comprising:
a discharge member coupled to the nozzle to discharge the contents passing through the nozzle to the outside, wherein the discharge member includes:
a discharge portion extending outwardly from the coupling portion by a predetermined length to discharge the contents to the outside;
As stated above, Skillin discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including all of the elements of claim 13 of the current invention except for:
a coupling portion coupled to the nozzle
a valve portion opened when the container is pressurized and closed when the container is released,
on which Skillin is silent.
Gross teaches the following elements:
a coupling portion coupled to the nozzle (Gross, Fig. 6 frustoconical annular seat 100)
a valve portion (Gross, Fig. 6 resiliently flexible valve 70)
opened when the container is pressurized and closed when the container is released (Gross, col 8 lines 44-49) ,
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of dispensers before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the disclosures of the dispenser, discharge member, and discharge portion of Skillin, with the valve seat and valve in the teachings of Gross to provide a positive means of closure of the dispenser to prevent leaking of the contained product when pressure is not applied to the container of the dispenser.
Regarding claim 14, Skillin discloses the following elements of claim 14:
The dispenser according to claim 1.
As stated above, Skillin discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including all of the elements of claim 14 of the current invention except for:
wherein the valve portion includes a silicon valve or a disk valve, wherein the silicon valve is used when the contents have a low viscosity and a required discharge amount is small, and wherein the disk valve is used when the contents have a high viscosity and the discharge amount is large.
Gross teaches a silicone rubber valve (Gross, col. 7 line 66 to col. 8 line 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of dispensers before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the disclosures of the dispenser of Skillin with the silicone rubber valve of Gross to provide a positive means of closure of the dispenser to prevent leaking of the contained product when pressure is not applied to the container of the dispenser.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 11-12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: with respect to claims 8 and 11-12 none of the most pertinent prior art of record teaches or fairly suggests the following features of a squeeze-type dispenser:
A support structure constructed from a series of cylindrical support columns spaced around a central nozzle;
Incorporating a valve body with guide portions surrounding, or partially surrounding, the individual cylindrical support columns;
Locking jaws on the protrusions from the stopper plate to affix the stopper plate into circumferential grooves near the ends of the support columns;
which would allow for a more efficient flow of the contents from the container to the nozzle and possibly a more efficient means of manufacturing the dispenser metering valve assemblies.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Marshall et al. (US 2014/0231462 A1) discloses a metered-dose dispenser with a shuttle piston valve for metering the dose, a check valve at the outlet, a spring, locking jaws to prevent piston valve from escaping on the return stroke, a support structure, threaded cap, and a deformable container.
Bian (CN 208192510 U) discloses a dosing cap for a deformable bottle containing cosmetics which comprises a frustoconical valve stem and mating valve seat (in a reverse orientation to the present invention), multiple flow paths for pressurized contents to flow through the nozzle and to move the valve, a spring, extended inlet and outlet portion of the nozzle, a threaded cap assembly, and a fastening portion between the support and the cap structures.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN RAYMOND ETZEL whose telephone number is (571)305-5217. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 7:00a-4:30p Fri 7:00a-11:00p.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/ALAN RAYMOND ETZEL/
Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/PAUL R DURAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754 August 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights