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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 1/6/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that searching for the apparatus and method claims would necessarily overlap with each other. This is not found persuasive because the claims to the different inventions require searching in different areas and employing different search techniques that would place an undue burned on the examiner. Claims 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 4, 6, 7, 9 and 11 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the rinsing line" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the base" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the interior" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the interior" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the base" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the region of the base" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the base of an inner container" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McIntyre et al (US-20160318749-A1).
McIntyre discloses:
1. A media container (Fig. 1), comprising a pressure vessel (100) that can be closed in a pressure-tight manner (par. 0062) with a cover (portion [a] in Fig. 2 below), wherein a compressed air connection (210) is provided for feeding compressed air into the pressure vessel (par. 0066) and a media connection (280) is provided for discharging medium from the pressure vessel (par. 0071), the media container further comprising a connection ring (portion [b] in Fig. 2 below) which can be mounted in a sealed manner between the pressure vessel (Fig. 3) and the cover and to which the media connection is attached (the connections are attached to the cover and the ring).
PNG
media_image1.png
676
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
2. The media container according to claim 1, wherein the compressed air connection is also attached to the connection ring (Fig. 2).
3. The media container according to claim 1, wherein a rising line (310) that can be introduced into the pressure vessel is connected to the media connection.
4. The media container according to claim 3, wherein the rising line is a shape stable hose (Fig. 1).
5. The media container according to claim 3, wherein the rising line is connected to the media connection via a fast-coupling (par. 0071).
7. The media container according to claim 1, wherein an inner container (150) is located in the interior of the pressure vessel.
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McIntyre et al (US-20160318749-A1) in view of Ohme (US-2246693-A).
McIntyre fails to teach wherein the base of the pressure vessel has an inclined platform for an inner container.
Ohme teaches that it was known in the art to manufacture with a base having an inclined platform (58) for an inner container (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have manufactured the container with a platform, as taught by Ohme, in order to properly position an inner container within the container.
Claim(s) 8 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McIntyre et al (US-20160318749-A1) in view of Eriksson (US-20150291410-A1).
McIntyre teaches a bushing (Fig. 11, at openings) but fails to teach wherein the connections are located in the connection ring such that the cover does not have a line projecting into the interior of the pressure vessel.
Eriksson teaches that it was known in the art to manufacture connections on a side surface of a device (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have manufacture the container with the connections on the connection ring, in order to adjust the profile of the container and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McIntyre et al (US-20160318749-A1) in view of Lee et al. (US-20200231913-A1).
McIntyre fails to teach a filling level sensor is arranged in the interior of the pressure vessel at the base of said pressure vessel .
Lee teaches that it was known in the art to manufacture with media container with a filling level sensor (40, par. 0098).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have manufactured the container with a sensor, as taught by Lee, in order to monitor the container.
Claim(s) 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McIntyre et al (US-20160318749-A1) in view of Lee et al. (US-20200231913-A1) and Ohme (US-2246693-A).
The modified container of McIntyre teaches wherein the sensor is at a region of the base (Lee, Fig. 9), but fails to teach the sensor integrated in an inclined platform.
Ohme teaches that it was known in the art to manufacture with a base having an inclined platform (58) for an inner container (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have manufactured the container with a platform, as taught by Ohme, in order to properly position an inner container within the container. It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY R ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7426. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday.
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.
/JEFFREY R ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733