fDETAILED 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 .
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
Phrases which can be implied, such as “The present invention is related to” (see line 1) and “The invention is further related” (see line 8) should not be present therein.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 0065, on line 4, “directional arm 2” should be “directional arm 1”; and
In paragraph 0081, on line 4, “directional arm 2” should be “directional arm 1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regard to claims 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8, it is unclear as to which element the term “it” (see claim 1, line 2; claim 2, line 1; claim 6, line 1; claim 7, line 2 and claim 8, line 2). Appropriate correction is required.
Further in regard to claim 8, on line 1, after “for”, “a” should be inserted.
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 1-12 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 regard to claims 1-12, an antecedent basis for “the fact” (see lines 1-2 of all claims 1-12) is referring.
Further in regard to claim 1, an antecedent basis for “the container’s resting position” (see line 5) has not been defined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 5, 6, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harris et al. (US 2025/01000758, hereinafter Harris).
In regard to claim 1, the Harris reference discloses a container for storage and distribution of fluids comprising:
a body 12 configured to hold a fluid, wherein the body comprises an opening (at an upper end thereof, see Figure 2) for fluid passage configured so that the fluid contained in the body flows toward the opening in the container’s resting position (should the container be resting on surface 18 or on its side surface); and
a directional arm 30 comprising a first end provided with an opening in communication with the body’s fluid passage opening and a second end wherein a check valve is arranged (see column 30, lines 1-11);
wherein the fluid located inside the directional arm is in direct contact with the fluid located in the body.
In regard to clam 5, the directional arm is fixed
In regard to claim 6, a lid 18 is arranged over the check valve.
In regard to claim 8, the Harris device includes a lid 14 for a fluid storage and distribution container 12 comprising:
an intermediate element (defined by the lower rim of lid 14, see Figure 2) connectable to a container body 12 for fluid storage and distribution; and
a directional arm 30 fitted to the intermediate element;
wherein the directional arm, as discussed above comprises a first end with an opening for the passage of fluid and second end with a check valve.
In regard to claim 10, the directional arm is fixed.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pehr (U.S. Patent 5,332,131) in view of Harris.
In regard to claim 1, the Pehr reference discloses a container for storage and distribution of fluids comprising:
a body 16 configured to hold a fluid, wherein the body comprises an opening (at threads 15, see Figure 4) for fluid passage configured so that the fluid contained in the body flows toward the opening in the container’s resting position (should the container be resting on upper rim, or on its side surface); and
a directional arm 7 comprising a first end 22 provided with an opening in communication with the body’s fluid passage opening and a second end 26 (see, for example, Figure 6)
wherein the fluid located inside the directional arm is in direct contact with the fluid located in the body.
Although the second, outlet end of the directional arm does not include a check valve, as claimed, attention is directed to the Harris reference which, as discussed above, discloses another container for storage and distribution of a fluid comprising a body and a directional arm wherein a check valve is positioned at the outlet end thereof in order to prevent leakage when the second, outlet end of the directional arm is exposed. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made the second, outlet end of the directional arm in the Pehr device can include such a check valve in order to prevent leakage when the second end of the directional arm is exposed.
In regard to claim 3, the directional arm is articulated.
In regard to claim 4, the opening for fluid passage from the container body is arranged on a lateral plane at a “lower portion” of the container body (depending on the orientation of the container body).
In regard to claim 7, the Pehr reference discloses an intermediate element 17, 18 between the container body and the directional arm (see Figure 4).
In regard to claim 8, the Pehr device includes a lid 2 for a fluid storage and distribution container 16 comprising:
an intermediate element 17, 18 connectable to a container body 16 for fluid storage and distribution; and
a directional arm 7 fitted to the intermediate element;
wherein the directional arm, as discussed above comprises a first end with an opening for the passage of fluid.
Although the second, outlet end of the directional arm does not include a check valve, as claimed, attention is directed to the Harris reference which, as discussed above, discloses another container for storage and distribution of a fluid comprising a body and a directional arm wherein a check valve is positioned at the outlet end thereof in order to prevent leakage when the second, outlet end of the directional arm is exposed. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made the second, outlet end of the directional arm in the Pehr device can include such a check valve in order to prevent leakage when the second end of the directional arm is exposed.
In regard to claim 9, the directional arm is articulated.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris in view of Harker et al. (U.S. Patent 3,669,323, hereinafter Harker).
In regard to claim 2, although the Harris reference does not include a clamping ring to fix the check valve to the arm, attention is directed to the Harker reference, which discloses another fluid dispensing device having a check valve 40 at the outlet end thereof wherein a clamping ring 46 is provided in order to secure the check valve within the outlet. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made the check valve in the Harris device can be of the type which requires a clamping ring in order to securely mount a check valve to the outlet should a user so choose to employ such a check valve.
In regard to claim 12, as discussed above, the directional arm in the Harris device is fixed.
Claims 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pehr in view of Harris as applied to above, and further in view of Harker.
In regard to claim 2, as discussed above, the check valve employed in the modified Pehr device can obviously be of the type employing a clamping ring.
In regard to claim 11, as discussed above the directional arm in the Pehr device is articulated.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The Turbett et al., Leary, Herr and Chollet references are cited as being directed to the state of the art as teachings of other fluid dispensers having articulated directional arms. It is noted the articulated directional arm in the Turbett device include a check valve 22 at the outlet end thereof.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J WALCZAK whose telephone number is (571)272-4895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30-4:00.
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, David Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
DJW
4/14/26
/DAVID J WALCZAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights