DETAILED ACTION
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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.
Claim(s) 1-12, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Smith (US 6520337).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Smith discloses, fig. 1, a product cushioning device for protecting a shock sensitive product, said product cushioning device comprising:
a wall at 24 defining a receiving area 16, the receiving area having a base 28 and an opening, the wall extends from the base to the opening, the product is capable of contacting the wall at plural contact portions, and
a series of inverted tapered cushions (fig. 4) disposed about a portion of the product receiving area to absorb impact in tri-axial vector (in at least three) directions, the tapered cushion having a plurality of shock value zones at 20 and comprising:
a tapered inner wall 24, fig. 3, proximate to the receiving area and extending from an end proximate to the base (28) to a second end proximate to the opening (top of the wall), and a curved, tapered outer wall at 20 (the edges of 20 are curved inward and are seen as tapering in cross section), fig. 2 and 4 (the taper is better seen in fig. 8); and
a compressible channel structure 30 connecting the tapered inner wall and the curved, tapered outer wall.
Smith discloses that the outer wall 20, each outer product supporting wall 22 and each inner product contacting wall 24 as being sloped upwardly and inwardly such that a plurality of the cushion structures can be stackable, col. 13:50-65. As seen in the figures, reference fig. 7, the space between the inner wall and product supporting outer wall is defined by an upper ridge at 26 that is narrow and as the walls extend downwardly, they move away from one another. As seen in fig. 11, both outer walls, 20 and 22 slope in the same direction, the inner wall slopes toward the outer walls, fig. 7.
With this in mind, it is understood that the description of the walls being sloped upwardly and inwardly, inwardly means that the inner and outer walls slope in toward one another, in opposite directions, especially since Smith desires stackablility.
Regarding claims 2 and 18, Smith discloses the product cushioning device is formed of a single sheet of thermoform material, col. 10: 5-10, fig. 6.
Regarding claims 3 and 10, the compressible channel structure of fig. 1 has a recurve shape, the curve changes direction at least at 72, fig. 1.
Regarding claim 4, the compressible channel structure comprises a channel inner wall, fig. 2, connected to the second end (end near the opening) of the tapered inner wall by a first curved ridge 26, a curved channel base, at 30 fig 3, a second curved ridge (ridge above 20, fig. 3) connecting the curved channel base to the cushion outer wall.
Regarding claims 5, 6, Smith discloses that the wall structure comprises a curved portion at each corner that spans between adjacent product contact portions (straight sides) from the plurality of product contact portions (areas of the wall on opposite sides of the corners where a product can contact the wall), wherein the wall structure/tapered inner wall 24 of the intermediate tapered cushion comprises the curved portion, and a corresponding outer wall portions at corners of the cushion outer wall that spans between adjacent product contact portions of the plurality of product contact portions, fig. 1 and 4.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Smith further discloses that the tapered inner wall has a tapered surface that corresponds to a portion of a first cone, a portion of a first cone could be a cross section of a wall of a first cone, as such, the tapered slope of the tapered inner wall corresponds to a taper of a cross-section of a wall of a first cone,
and likewise, the cushion outer wall has a tapered surface, tapered in an opposite direction since, as applied above, the outer and inner walls taper toward one another, that corresponds to a cross-section taken through a portion of a wall of a second cone, the taper of each of the walls are capable of being aligned with walls of two different cones that have a common axis and taper in opposite directions such that the walls are defined by the two cones tapering in opposite directions, see annotated fig. 8 of Smith.
PNG
media_image1.png
632
336
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Smith discloses that the series of inverted tapered cushions comprises fig. 4:
an end tapered cushion; and
an intermediate tapered cushion.
Regarding claim 12, As best as can be understood, the gaps at the corners disclosed by Smith, fig. 4, between the end tapered cushion and the intermediate tapered cushion are understood to be stress concentrators since they allow movement of the adjacent cushions.
Regarding claim 19, Smith discloses, fig. 1, that the product cushioning device is capable of being used as an end cap.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-17 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: After further consideration, claim 13 stands allowable because the curved spanning portions are between the tapered cushions and are not part of the intermediate tapered cushion of Smith.
Claims 14-17 are allowable because they depend from claim 13.
Response to Arguments
In response to applicant's arguments against the 35 U.S.C. 112 2nd rejections, it is put on the record that applicant the contact portions of the wall structure are the faces of the wall that physically contact a product, see page 12, last paragraph of the Remarks. A plurality of product contact portions is interpreted as the side wall and end wall faces of the wall structure since no particular “structure” has been defined other than the surfaces seen in the figures. In addition, applicant states that it is clear that the tapered inner wall further defines portions of the wall structure and is interpreted as such to avoid double inclusion. With this in mind, the rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 10 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that that the walls of Smith are sloped in the same direction, examiner disagrees. Referencing the same section of Smith that applicant cites on page 16 of the Remarks, under the 102 section: Smith discloses that the outer wall 20, each outer product supporting wall 22 and each inner product contacting wall 24 as being sloped upwardly and inwardly such that a plurality of the cushion structures can be stackable, col. 13:50-65. As seen in the figures, reference fig. 7, the space between the inner wall and product supporting outer wall is defined by an upper ridge at 26 that is narrow and as the walls extend downwardly, they move away from one another. As seen in fig. 11, both outer walls, 20 and 22 slope in the same direction.
It is understood that the description of the walls being sloped upwardly and inwardly, inwardly means that inner and outer walls slope in toward one another, in opposite directions, especially since Smith desires stackablility. As such, applicant’s argument against Smith is not found persuasive.
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 MOLLIE L IMPINK whose telephone number is (571)270-1705. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (7:30-3:30).
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571) 272-4561. 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.
/MOLLIE IMPINK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
MOLLIE LLEWELLYN IMPINK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights