DETAILED ACTION
Amendments filed on 8/26/2026 has been entered.
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 § 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 29, 30 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 29, 30 recite “the outer housing”. The bolded phrase makes the claimed limitations indefinite, because the bolded limitation has not been recited previously. For the purpose of examination, it is interpreted as the upper housing as recited in claim 21. More clarification is required.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 21-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (2014/0352929 A1), in view of Fryer (2019/0219321 A1), in view of Whitworth (US 20240383665 A1), and in view of Thelin (US 12,247,779 B2).
Claim 21: Wu discloses an insulated container (100), comprising:
an outer housing (housing 207 used as outer housing) having a plurality of sidewalls defining an upper housing (top container 207) having an open first end (inherent) and including, a lower housing (bottom container 207), and
a horizontal divider wall (dividers 206) integrally formed with at least one sidewall (sidewall of container 207; see FIG.4) of the upper housing (top container 207) and housing separating the upper and the lower housing, the horizontal divider wall (206) having a plurality of layers (rails 146 used as layers) including at least one non-porous layer (146 is non porous layer),
Wu discloses the claimed limitations in claim 21, but fails to disclose at least one porous layer, a lid lock with a handle, a lid hingedly coupled to the outer housing and moveable to close the open first end, the lid including a channel in which the handle of the lid lock is received.
However, Whitworth teaches a lid lock (212), a lid hingedly (236) coupled to the outer housing and moveable to close the open first end (see FIG.2), the lid (108) including a channel (annotated FIG.1; paragraph [36]: lock aperture 212 aligned for receiving a lock) in which the lid lock (212) is received for the purpose of securing the container in a closed configuration (paragraph [36]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Wu to include a lid lock, a lid hingedly coupled to the outer housing and moveable to close the open first end, the lid including a channel in which the lid lock is received as taught by Whitworth in order to secure the container in a closed configuration.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (channel)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
710
784
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Further, Fryer teaches one porous lower layer (i.e., pore layer 202) for the purpose of preventing liquid dripping (paragraph [61]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Wu to include porous lower layer as taught by Fryer in order to prevent liquid dripping.
PNG
media_image2.png
344
356
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Further, Thelin teaches a lid lock (locking element 202) with a handle (latch handle module 200 allows manually locking/unlocking of lid 3), the handle (200) of the lid lock (202) for the purpose of providing user interface to be mounted to cooling box in a more comfortable and reliable way (col. 1 lines 47-50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Wu to include a lid lock with a handle, the handle of the lid lock as taught by Thelin in order to provide user interface to be mounted to cooling box in a more comfortable and reliable way.
PNG
media_image3.png
413
544
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 22: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 21, wherein the handle (Whitworth, 112) is pivotably coupled to a protruding portion of the at least one sidewall of the upper housing (top container 207) adjacent to the open first end (Whitworth, paragraph [51]: handle 112 can contact outer wall affixed to handle hinge 216; to clarify, handle 112 protruding sidewall of housing see FIG.7).
Claim 23: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 22, wherein the handle (Whitworth, 112) is pivotably coupled to opposing sides of the protruding portion of the at least one sidewall of the upper housing (top container 207) adjacent to the open first end (inherent).
Claim 24: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 22, wherein the channel (Whitworth, annotated FIG.1) is positioned longitudinally within a protruding portion of at least one sidewall of the lid (to clarify, channel which include a cover is attached to the end of lid 108 as shown in FIG.2 & FIG.6 therefore the cover section of channel is extended from end of the lid 108) and receives a lip (Thelin, 201) of the lid lock (Thelin, 202) when the lid lock is in a locked configuration.
Claim 25: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 24, wherein the lid lock (Thelin, 202) includes a first end (inherent) pivotably coupled to the handle (200) and a second end (inherent) comprising the lip (Thelin, 201) receivable within the channel (Whitworth, annotated FIG.1) in the locked configuration.
Claim 26: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 25, where the lip (Thelin, 201) is configured to prevent the lid (Thelin, 3) from opening when the lip is seated within the channel (Whitworth, annotated FIG.1).
Claim 27: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 22, wherein the handle (Whitworth, 112) is configured to pivotably translate away from the open first end of the upper housing (207) when actuating the lid lock (Whitworth, 212) into the locked configuration.
Claim 28: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 22, wherein when the lid (Whitworth, 108) closes the open first end, the channel (Whitworth, annotated FIG.1) is parallel and vertically aligned with a pivotable axis (Whitworth, paragraph [36]: lock aperture 212 aligned for receiving a lock) of the handle (Whitworth, 112) extending longitudinally therethrough.
Claim 29: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 21, wherein the lid (Whitworth, 108) and the outer housing (housing 207 used as outer housing) each comprise at least one lock hole such that a first lock hole (Whitworth, hole of aperture 212) of the lid (Whitworth, 108) is vertically aligned with a first lock hole (Whitworth, aligned with hole of aperture 208) of the outer housing (top container 207) when the lid (Whitworth, 108) is moved to close the open first end.
Claim 30: Wu as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 29, wherein the first lock hole (Whitworth, aligned with hole of aperture 208) of the lid (Whitworth, 108) is positioned within a protruding portion (Whitworth, annotated FIG.1) of at least one sidewall (Whitworth, protruding portion attached to side wall which is extended from the side of 108) of the lid (Whitworth, 108) adjacent to the channel (Whitworth, annotated FIG.1) and the first lock hole of the outer housing (top container 207) is positioned within the protruding portion (Whitworth, annotated FIG.1) of the at least one a sidewall of the upper housing (top container 207) adjacent to handle (Whitworth, 112).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (protruding portion)]
PNG
media_image4.png
654
766
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruton (US 2024/0369280 A1), in view of Deshpande (US 2021/0244199 A1).
Claim 35: Bruton fails to disclose wherein the indicator comprises at least one of a color indicator, a textual indicator, a graphical indicator, or an illuminating indicator.
However, Deshpande teaches the indicator comprises at least one of a color indicator, a textual indicator, a graphical indicator, or an illuminating indicator (paragraph [53]: indicator light 182 illuminates first color when door is locked and second color when door is unlocked) for the purpose of providing an indication of whether cooler reached the desired storge temperature (paragraph [47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Bruton to include the indicator comprises at least one of a color indicator, an illuminating indicator as taught by Bruton in order to provide an indication of whether cooler reached the desired storge temperature.
Claims 36, 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruton (US 2024/0369280 A1).
Claim 36: Bruton discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 34, wherein the indicator (56) is positioned in the sidewall of the outer housing (paragraph [28]; FIG.1), Except for the indicator is positioned in the first depression. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Bruton to place the indicator positioned in the first depression in order to enhance locking and unlocking the drawer, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art - Location of Parts: MPEP 2144.04 VI-C.
Claim 38: Bruton discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 37, wherein the drawer lock (latches 116 moved into a locking position) is received in the sidewall (see FIG.1) of the outer housing (12) when the handle (annotated FIG.1) is moved radially away from the drawer (104) to cause the drawer lock to move into the locked configuration (functional language), Except for the drawer lock is received within the first depression. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Bruton to place the drawer lock received within the first depression in order to enhance locking and unlocking the drawer, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art - Location of Parts: MPEP 2144.04 VI-C.
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 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 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 31-34, 37, 39, 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bruton (US 2024/0369280 A1).
Claim 31: Bruton discloses an insulated container (FIG.1), comprising:
an outer housing (cooler housing 12) having an upper housing (18) and a lower housing (20) separated by a horizontal divider wall (26), the lower housing (20) defining a drawer chamber and including at least one drawer (104) slidably received within the drawer chamber and having a handle (annotated FIG.1) on a front wall (106) of the at least one drawer (104), the insulated container having a drawer lock (latches 116 moved into a locking position) received within a first depression (annotated FIG.1; space below the handle to place hand or fingers) in a sidewall of the upper housing (18) in a locked configuration and received within a first depression (annotated FIG.1) in the front wall (106) of the at least one drawer (104) in an unlocked configuration.
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (handle)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (depression)]
PNG
media_image5.png
792
677
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 32: Bruton discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 31, wherein in the locked configuration, the drawer lock (latches 116 moved into a locking position) is slidably seated in the first depression (annotated FIG.1; space below the handle to place hand or fingers) in the front wall (106) of the at least one drawer (104) and in the unlocked configuration, the drawer lock (latches 116 moved into a locking position) is slidably seated in the first depression of the sidewall of the outer housing (12).
Claim 33: Bruton discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 31, wherein the handle (annotated FIG.1) includes an opening (to clarify, handle placed inside an opening on front wall of drawer) or a protrusion configured to allow a user to grasp the handle (space below the handle to place hand or fingers).
Claim 34: Bruton discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 31, wherein the drawer lock (to clarify, the lock is at the lid 40) includes an indicator (block 56 used as indicator) configured to provide an indication of the drawer lock in the locked and unlocked configuration (paragraph [28]: blocks 56 associated with engaging element 108 indicating moving into unlocked position; see FIG.4).
Claim 37: Bruton discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 31, wherein the handle (annotated FIG.1) is pivotably coupled to the front wall (106) of the at least one drawer (104) and incudes the drawer lock (latches 116 moved into a locking position).
Claim 39: Bruton discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 37, wherein the drawer lock (latches 116 moved into a locking position) includes a protrusion (engaging element 108 used as protrusion on left side of drawer opposite to the handle) opposite the handle (annotated FIG.1) and the protrusion (108) is received within the first depression (annotated FIG.1) in the sidewall in the locked configuration.
Claim 40: Bruton discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 37, wherein the handle (annotated FIG.1) is positioned within the first depression (annotated FIG.1) of the front wall of the at least one drawer (104) in the locked configuration, such that a surface (inherent) of the handle is flush with a surface (inherent) of the front wall (106) of the at least one drawer (104).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 8/26/2026, with respect to all the claims under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 & 103 have been fully considered and they are moot. Applicant’s arguments to the amendments are addressed in this office action. Therefore, a new ground(s) of rejections have been made in response to the amendments.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI whose telephone number is (313)446-6612. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm 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, Len Tran can be reached on (571)272-1184. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /PAUL ALVARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
