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 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) 1-15 and 18-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsujiguchi (US2014/0319093), in view of Ishii (US8,469,213).
1. Tsujiguchi teaches a polyester resin closure (Fig. 1, paragraph 0037) that mounts onto a finish of a container (Fig. 2); the polyester resin closure comprising: a plug seal (8) configured to seal against an inner surface of the finish; an annular wall (4) configured to seat against a top surface of a rim of the finish; an outer cylindrical wall (6) extending downward from the annular wall, wherein the outer cylindrical wall comprises: a plurality of threaded portions (inner surface of the annular wall, at 28) that each begin at a corresponding
thread start; and a plurality of knurled portions (outer surface of the annular wall, at 26) distributed circumferentially around the outer cylindrical wall. Tsujiguchi DIFFERS in that it does not disclose a tamper evidence band configured to fold under a tamper evidence ledge of the finish. Attention, however is directed to Ishii, which teaches a tamper evidence band can be folded under a finish (Ishii, Fig. 6 at 34, where member 34 is folded beneath the finish). Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill within the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Tsujiguchi, in view of Ishii, by employing the band to be folded under the finish in order to have an alternative durable way of retaining the band to the finish.
2. The polyester resin closure of claim 1, wherein the plurality of knurled portions are uniformly distributed around the outer cylindrical wall (Fig. 1).
3. The polyester resin closure of claim 1, wherein the plurality of knurled portions are axial and extend at least part of the way between the annular wall and a lower portion of the outer cylindrical wall (Fig. 1).
4. The polyester resin closure of claim 1, wherein the each of the plurality of threaded portions is disposed between each of the plurality of knurled portions (on the inner surface of the knurled portions).
5. The polyester resin closure of claim 4, wherein the plurality of threaded portions is equally distributed around the circumference of the outer cylindrical wall (Fig. 1).
6. The polyester resin closure of claim 1, wherein the tamper evidence band (Fig. 3) that comprises a plurality of internal knurls disposed about an inner surface of the tamper evidence band (Fig. 1).
7. The polyester resin closure of claim 6, wherein the plurality of internal knurls is
distributed unevenly about a circumference of the inner surface of the tamper evidence band (Fig. 1).
8. The polyester resin closure of claim 6, wherein the tamper evidence feature further comprises a folded band (Fig. 1).
9. The polyester resin closure of claim 8, wherein the plurality of internal knurls contacts a surface of the tamper evidence band when the closure is installed onto the finish (Fig. 1).
10. The polyester resin closure of claim 1, wherein the polyester resin comprises
polyethylene terephthalate, polyethylene furandicarboxylate, or a copolymer of
polyethylene terephthalate and polyethylene furandicarboxylate (paragraph 0037).
11. The polyester resin closure of claim 1, wherein the outer cylindrical wall comprises an outer skirt having a clearance with a corresponding outer surface of the rim to enable the polyester resin closure to elastically deform in the region of the plug seal (Fig. 1).
12. The polyester resin closure of claim 1, wherein the plug seal (8) comprises a chamfer for guiding the plug seal past a lip of the inner surface of the finish when the polyester resin closure is capped onto the container (Fig. 1).
13. The polyester resin closure of claim 1, wherein the plug seal comprises an inner cylindrical wall that extends downwardly from the annular wall (Fig. 1).
14. The polyester resin closure of claim 13, wherein the inner cylindrical wall comprises a radial surface that is dimensioned for an interference fit with a corresponding inwardly facing surface of the rim of finish for sealing (Fig. 1).
15. The polyester resin closure of claim 14, wherein the interference fit is configured to lock the polyester resin closure to the finish (Fig. 1).
18. The polyester resin closure of claim 13, wherein a lower wall extends across a bottom of the inner cylindrical wall (Fig. 1).
19. The polyester resin closure of claim 18, wherein the lower wall is configured to change shape in response to pressurized contents within the interior of the container (Fig. 1).
20. The polyester resin closure of claim 19, wherein the lower wall has a concave upward shape that becomes a convex upward shape when pressure is applied by pressurized contents within the interior of the container (Fig. 1).
21. The polyester resin closure of claim 13, wherein the plug seal is configured to establish a sealing interface with the finish (Fig. 1).
22. The polyester resin closure of claim 21, wherein a width of the sealing interface is configured to bridge defects present in the finish (Fig. 1).
23. The polyester resin closure of claim 21, wherein the lower wall is configured to increase pressure on a sealing interface between the plug seal and the finish (Fig. 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the amendment defines over the prior art. Examiner disagrees. See the updated rejection above that reads on the amendment.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-17 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. Claims 24-25 are allowable, subpart a is not obvious, in light of the other claimed limitations.
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 KAREEN KAY THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5611. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
/KAREEN K THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights