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
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) 32-35, 37-39 and 42-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carpenter et al. (U.S. Patent No. 3117692) in view of Kirkis (U.S. Patent No. 4457447).
Regarding Claim 32, Carpenter et al. discloses a removable lid 3 (Figure 2) for a container, the lid comprising: a top wall having a planar label portion 8 (Figure 2), the top wall configured to cover an open mouth (figure 2) of a container base 4 (figure 1); at least one raised rib 1 (Figure 2) extending upward of the planar label portion of the top wall and forming at least one corresponding cavity on a bottom surface of the lid (Figure 3), wherein the at least one raised rib has opposing ends and a central portion between the opposing ends (Figure 2). Carpenter et al. does not disclose a plurality of braces spanning the at least one cavity of the at least one raised rib and extending at least partially along a bottom surface of the planar label portion of the top wall, wherein the plurality of braces are spaced apart from one another and do not intersect one another. However, Kirkis teaches a plurality of braces 42/43 (Figure 4 and 5) spanning the at least one cavity of the at least one raised rib (figure 4) and extending at least partially along a bottom surface of the planar label portion of the top wall (Figure 4), wherein the plurality of braces are spaced apart from one another and do not intersect one another (Figure 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carpenter et al. to include the above, as taught by Kirkis, in order to provide strength to the raised rib.
Regarding Claim 33, Carpenter et al. discloses the at least one raised rib surrounds at least a portion of the planar label portion of the top wall (Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 34, Carpenter et al. discloses the at least one raised rib has a generally rounded top surface (figure 3).
Regarding Claim 35, Carpenter et al. discloses each of the opposing ends of the at least one rib have an end portion tapering downwardly from the central portion (figure 2).
Regarding Claim 37, Kirkis teaches the plurality of braces restrict the at least one raised rib from spreading apart as a result of stacking loads being placed on the lid (figure 4).
Regarding Claim 38, Carpenter et al. discloses the at least one raised rib generally follows a shape of a peripheral edge of the lid (figure 2).
Regarding Claim 39, Carpenter et al. discloses a container comprising: a container base 4 (Figure 2) having a bottom wall portion (Figure 2), an upstanding sidewall portion 7 (figure 2) that extends to an outwardly extending flange 12 (figure 2) and defines an interior of the container base (Figure 2); and a container lid 3 (Figure 2) having a top wall having a planar label portion 8 (Figure 2) and a skirt extending downward of the planar label portion 11 (Figure 2), the skirt configured to engage the flange of the container base to removably secure the container lid to the container base (Figure 3), the container lid having at least one raised portion extending upward of the planar label portion 1 (Figure 2) and at least in part about the planar label portion (Figure 2), wherein the at least one raised portion has opposing ends and a central portion between the opposing ends (Figure 2), wherein an underside of the at least one raised portion forms a cavity (figure 3). Carpenter et al. does not disclose a plurality of braces spanning the cavity of the at least one raised portion of the container lid, wherein the plurality of braces extend at least partially along a bottom surface of the planar label portion of the top wall, and wherein the plurality of braces are spaced apart from one another and do not intersect one another. However, Kirkis teaches a plurality of braces spanning the cavity of the at least one raised portion of the container lid 42/43 (Figure 4 and 5), wherein the plurality of braces extend at least partially along a bottom surface of the planar label portion of the top wall (Figure 4), and wherein the plurality of braces are spaced apart from one another and o does not intersect one another (Figure 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carpenter et al. to include the above, as taught by Kirkis, in order to provide strength to the raised portion.
Regarding Claim 42, Carpenter et al. discloses each of the opposing ends of the at least one raised portion has an end portion tapering downwardly from the central portion (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 43, Kirkis teaches the plurality of braces restrict the at least one raised portion from spreading apart as a result of stacking loads being placed on the container lid (Figure 4 and 5).
Regarding Claim 44, Carpenter et al. discloses the at least one raised portion generally follows a shape of a perimeter of the container lid (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 45, Carpenter et al. discloses the at least one raised portion has a generally rounded top surface (Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 46, Carpenter et al. discloses the skirt of the container lid includes an inwardly protruding rib (Figure 3) that engages the flange of the container base to removably secure the container lid to the container base (Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 47, Carpenter et al. discloses the bottom wall portion of the container base is shaped to fit within the at least one raised portion of a second container lid in a stacked configuration (Figure 1 and 3).
Claim(s) 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carpenter et al. (U.S. Patent No. 3117692) in view of Kirkis (U.S. Patent No. 4457447) and Richardson (U.S. Patent No. 1982883).
Regarding Claim 41, Carpenter et al. and Kirkis teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for a foil cover attached to the flange of the container base to enclose the interior of the container base and that is positioned between the container base and container lid. However, Richardson teaches a foil cover 117 (Figure 10) attached to the flange of the container base to enclose the interior of the container base and that is positioned between the container base and container lid (figure 10). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carpenter et al. and Kirkis to include the above, as taught by Richardson, in order to provide a seal for the container.
Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 II(A), MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 32-35, 37-39 and 41-47 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ELIZABETH J VOLZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm 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.
/E.J.V/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/JEFFREY R ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Prosecution Insights