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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with C.F.R 1.84(t) because the drawing sheet numbering must be clear and larger than the numbers used as reference characters to avoid confusion. MPEP 608.02 V.
The drawings are objected to for failing to comply with 37 C.F.R. 1.84 (p)(3) because numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least .32 cm (1/8 inch) in height. MPEP 608.02 V.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 76, 80F, 78, 92S, 64U.
The drawings are objected to because reference character 64 of figure 23 is not directed to an inner circumferential sidewall of the annular cylinder as disclosed.
The drawings are objected to because reference character 65 of figure 23 is not directed to a bump seat as disclosed.
The drawings are objected to because reference character 68 of figure 21 is directed to a flat upper surface and not lower engaging surface as disclosed.
The drawings are objected to because reference character 150 of figure 21 is not directed to a spacing bump as disclosed.
The drawings are objected to because reference character BH of figure 21 is not directed to a bump height as disclosed, but rather depicts a distance between the flat upper surface of the upper section and a top surface of a recess in the flat upper surface.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “50” has been used to designate both upper engaging surface and a top surface of the disc shaped body.
The drawings are objected to because reference characters 90 and 92 have been reversed between figures 15 and 19.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with C.F.R 1.84(h)(3) because the plane upon which a sectional view is taken should be indicated on the view from which the section is cut by a broken line. MPEP 608.02 V. At least figures 2, 16, and 18 are not indicated by a broken line.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 90G, 92G. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because reference characters "86" and "76" have all been used to designate second coupler.
The disclosure is objected to because reference character “46” has been used to designate upper section and lower section.
The disclosure is objected to because reference character “130R” has been used to designate backside and outward protrusion.
The disclosure is objected to because reference character “C” has been used to designate reference, reference location, closed position and closed.
The disclosure is objected to because reference character “O” has been used to designate reference, reference location, open position and open.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a first fluid communication relationship” of line 2 should be corrected to “the first, fluid communication relationship”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a second, closed configuration” of line 2 should be corrected to “the second, closed, spill resistant configuration”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the outward surface” of line 3 should be corrected to “the arcuate radial outward surface”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the second closed configuration” of line 6 should be corrected to “the second, closed, spill resistant configuration”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the first fluid communication relationship” of line 4 should be corrected to “the first, fluid communication relationship”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the second closed configuration” of lines 4-5 should be corrected to “the second, closed, spill resistant configuration”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the first fluid communication relationship” of line 3 should be corrected to “the first, fluid communication relationship”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the second closed configuration” of line 3 should be corrected to “the second, closed, spill resistant configuration”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 34 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the second, closed configuration” of line 3 should be corrected to “the second, closed, spill resistant configuration”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the first, fluid communication relationship” of line 3 should be corrected to “the first fluid communication relationship”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the second, closed configuration” of lines 3-4 should be corrected to “the second, closed, spill resistant configuration”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 14, 18-19, and 34-36 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 14 recites the limitation "the outward surface" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The limitation of claim 17 that “together the detents and the protruding positioners establish a registration system that provides haptic snap action of the lid between the (1) the first fluid communication relationship and (2) the second closed configuration” is led to be indefinite as it is unclear if the haptic snap action occurs at the first relationship and the second configuration or if the haptic snap action occurs when the lid is between the two. In light of the original disclosure the claim will be interpreted as the former, however further clarification and/or correction is required. Claims 19, 34, and 36 are likewise found to be indefinite.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the spacing bumps" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 35 is led to be rejected in that it is dependent on an indefinite claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The limitation of claim 8 that the downwardly extending annular cylinder comprises a distal end does not further limit claim 4 as all physical structures necessarily already have a distal end. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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) 1-4, 8, 28, 30, and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (KR 1020190118238).
Claim 1: Kim discloses a lid, the lid sized and shaped for engagement with an open end of some drink container having circular interior sidewalls adjacent the open end, the lid comprising: (a) a lower section having a disc shaped body, the body having an upper engaging surface, the body including (1) a liquid conduit therethrough defined by a first interior passageway wall, and (2) a vent conduit therethrough defined by a second interior passageway wall, and a first coupler, (b) a upper section, the upper section comprising an upper body, the upper body having a lower engaging surface, a plurality of passageways therethrough, the plurality of passageways comprising (1) a drink passageway, and (2) a vent passageway; and a second coupler; (c) wherein the lower section and the upper section are rotatably joined by latching the second coupler together, and wherein the lower section and the upper section are detachable from each other by unlatching the first coupler and the second coupler from each other; and (d) wherein the lower engaging surface and the upper engaging surface have an axis of rotation extending therethrough, wherein the lower section and the upper section are alternately positionable when coupled together, between (1) a first, fluid communication relationship wherein a fluid in the drink container may flow through the liquid conduit and through the drink passageway, and (2) a second, closed, spill resistant configuration (see annotated fig. 1 below, annotated partial fig. 3 below, and fig. 2 & 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
783
583
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
594
890
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Kim discloses wherein when the lower section and the upper section are coupled together in a first fluid communication relationship, the vent conduit and the vent passageway are oriented to provide a vapor passageway (see annotated fig. 1 above, annotated partial fig. 3 above, and fig. 2 & 6).
Claim 3: Kim discloses wherein when the lower section and the upper section are coupled together in a second, closed configuration, the vent conduit and the vent passageway are oriented to prevent vapor passage (see annotated fig. 1 above, annotated partial fig. 3 above, and fig. 2 & 6).
Claim 4: Kim discloses wherein the first coupler comprises a downwardly extending annular cylinder, the downwardly extending annular cylinder having an inner circumferential sidewall (see annotated partial fig. 3 above).
Claim 8: Kim discloses wherein the downwardly extending annular cylinder comprises a distal end (see annotated partial fig. 3 above).
Claim 28: Kim discloses wherein the disc shaped body of the lower section further comprises an outer sidewall, and wherein the outer sidewall provides a manual gripping surface as any surface is greppable (see annotated fig. 3 above).
Claim 30: Kim discloses wherein the disc shaped body of the lower section further comprises (a) a lateral circumferential cup seal seat, and (b) a lateral circumferential cup seal, the lateral circumferential cup seal located in the lateral circumferential cup seal seat, and wherein the lateral circumferential cup seal is sized and shaped for manually removable fiction fit engagement with an open end of a drink container (see annotated fig. 3 above).
Claim 31: Kim discloses a lid, the lid sized and shaped for engagement with an open end of a drink container having circular interior sidewalls adjacent the open end, the lid comprising: (a) a lower section having a disc shaped body, the body having an upper engaging surface, the body including (1) a liquid conduit therethrough defined by a first interior passageway wall, and (2) a vent conduit therethrough defined by a second interior passageway wall, and a downwardly extending annular cylindrical receiver having an inner circumferential sidewall; (b) an upper section, the upper section comprising an upper body, the upper body having a lower engaging surface, a plurality of passageways therethrough, the plurality of passageways comprising (1) a drink passageway, and (2) a vent passageway, a first prong and a second prong, wherein the first prong and the second prong each extend downward from the lower engaging surface, wherein the first prong and the second prong each have an arcuate radial outward surface which is sized and shaped for insertion into the downwardly extending annular cylindrical receiver, and wherein the first prong and the second prong are each configured for and manufactured with material and that provides outwardly biased engagement with the inner circumferential sidewall of the downwardly extending annular cylinder receiver; (c) wherein the lower section and the upper section are rotatably joined by latching the first prong and the second prong to the annular cylinder, and wherein the lower section and the upper section are detachable from each other by unlatching the first prong and the second prong from the annular cylinder; and (d) wherein the lower engaging surface and the upper engaging surface have an axis of rotation extending therethrough, wherein the lower section and the upper section are alternately positionable when rotatably joined, between (1) a first fluid communication relationship wherein a fluid in the drink container may flow through the liquid conduit and through the drink passageway, and (2) a second, closed, spill resistant configuration (see annotated fig. 1 above, annotated partial fig. 3 below, and fig. 2 & 6).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5-7, 9-15, 17, 20, and 32-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 1020190118238) further in view of Mason (US 20240190640).
Claim 5: Kim discloses the claimed invention except wherein the downwardly extending annular cylinder further comprises a plurality of arcuate cutouts spaced apart around the inner circumferential sidewall of the annular cylinder.
Mason teaches a lid 14 having a hub 46 with scallops 48 (arcuate cutouts) formed in the interior surface of the hub 46 and a closure 16 having spring legs 52, 54 with protuberances 56 on the radially outer surface that may engage the scallops (arcuate cutouts) at the closure 16 open position and closed position (see fig. 5-7 and P. 0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the downwardly extending annular cylinder to have a plurality of scallops 48 (arcuate cutouts) spaced apart around the inner circumferential sidewall of the annular cylinder and to have provided engageable protuberances 56 on the second coupler, as taught by Mason, in order to provide positive feedback at the first, fluid communication relationship and second, closed, spill resistant configuration.
Claim 6: The combination discloses wherein the scallops 48 (arcuate cutouts) have a most radially outward sidewall, and where the most radially outward sidewall extends radially outward from the inner circumferential sidewall of the annular cylinder for a distance RC (see fig. 6 ‘640).
Claim 7: The combination discloses the claimed invention except wherein the distance RC is about 0.8 mm
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have made the distance RC be about 0.8 mm in order to disengage from the scallops (arcuate cutouts) with a relatively low amount of force and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)
Examiner notes that no criticality has been established for the claimed value.
Claim 9: The combination discloses wherein the second coupler comprises a first prong and a second prong, wherein the first prong and the second prongs each extend downward from the lower engaging surface of the upper section (see annotated partial fig. 3 below).
Claim 10: The combination discloses wherein the first prong and the second prong each have an arcuate radial outward surface which is sized and shaped for insertion into the downwardly extending annular cylinder, and configured for and manufactured with material that provides outwardly biased engagement with the inner circumferential sidewall of the downwardly extending annular cylinder (see annotated partial fig. 3 above).
Claim 11: The combination discloses wherein the first prong and the second prong each further comprise, on their respective radially outward surface, a protuberance 56 (protruding positioner), each protuberance 56 (protruding positioner) sized and shaped for manually rotatable friction fit within and between said scallops 48 (arcuate cutouts) spaced apart along the inner circumferential sidewall of the annular cylinder, and configured for manually rotatable engagement with respect to the inner circumferential sidewall of the annular cylinder (see fig. 5-7 ‘640).
Claim 12: The combination discloses wherein each of the protuberance 56 (protruding positioner) comprises a most radially outward sidewall surface, and wherein the most radially outward sidewall surface extends radially outward from the outward surface of the respective first prong and the second prong for a distance of RP (see fig. 5-7 ‘640).
Claim 13: The combination discloses the claimed invention except wherein the distance RP is about zero point four one three (0.413) millimeters.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have made the distance RP be about 0.413 mm in order to disengage from the scallops (arcuate cutouts) with a relatively low amount of force and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)
Examiner notes that no criticality has been established for the claimed value.
Claim 14: The combination discloses wherein each protuberance 56 (protruding positioner) further comprises a most radially outward sidewall surface, and wherein the most radially outward sidewall surface extends radially outward from the outward surface of the first prong and of the second prong for a distance of RP, and wherein the distance RC is greater than the distance RP (see fig. 5-7 ‘640).
Claim 15: The combination discloses wherein the first prong and the second prong each comprise a lower portion having an outwardly biased latch, and wherein the outwardly biased latch is sized and shaped for rotatable latching attachment when engaged with the annular cylinder (see annotated partial fig. 3 above).
Claim 17: The combination discloses wherein the scallops (arcuate cutouts) comprise detents and the protuberances 56 (protruding positioners) comprise locating surfaces, and wherein together the detents and the protuberance 56 (protruding positioner) establish a registration system that provides haptic snap action of the lid between the (1) the first fluid communication relationship and (2) the second closed configuration (see fig. 5-7 ‘640).
Claim 20: The combination discloses wherein the first prong and the second prong each further include a manually engageable pinch surface, whereby the first and second prongs may be urged radially inward, for disengagement from the annular cylinder, so that the upper section and the lower section are separable (see annotated partial fig. 3 above).
Claim 32: See claim 5 above.
Claim 33: See claim 11 above.
Claim 34: See claim 17 above.
Claim(s) 16, 18, 19, 35, and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 1020190118238) and Mason (US 20240190640) further in view of Dolph (US 20250002234).
Claim 16: The combination discloses the claimed invention except wherein the lower engaging surface of the upper section further comprises a pair of spacing bumps, wherein a spacing bump is located radially outward from the first prong and from the second prong, wherein the spacing bumps are configured to slightly space apart the lower section from the upper section when the lid is moved between the (1) the first, fluid communication relationship and (2) the second, closed configuration.
Dolph teaches a container lid 104 having a base 118 with an upper surface 136 having receptors 134 and a cover 120 having a lower surface 140 with detents 138 (spacing bumps) located radially outward from catches 144 (see fig. 2A and 2B & P. 0023).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the upper engaging surface to have receptors 134 and the lower engaging surface to have detents 138 (spacing bumps) located radially outward from the first and second prongs, as taught by Dolph, in order to positive additional feedback at the first, fluid communication relationship and second, closed, spill resistant configuration and to allow the upper section to be elevated relative the lower section during rotation.
Claim 18: The combination discloses wherein the upper engaging surface of the lower section further comprises a plurality of receptors 134 (bump seats) spaced apart adjacent an upper end of the inner circumferential sidewall of the annular cylinder, wherein the receptors 134 (bump seats) are each sized and shaped to accommodate one of the detents 138 (spacing bumps) therein.
Claim 19: The combination discloses wherein haptic snap action of the registration system is enhanced by snap fit of detents 138 (spacing bumps) in receptors 134 (bump seats) when the lid is rotated between (1) the first fluid communication relationship and (2) the second closed configuration.
Claim 35: See claims 16 and 18 above.
Claim 36: See claim 19 above.
Claim(s) 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 1020190118238) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bratsch (US 20100206875).
Claim 22: Kim discloses the claimed invention except for a vertical circumferential seal, the vertical circumferential seal providing a liquid tight seal between the lower section and the upper section.
Bratsch teaches a sealing cap 4 which is twistable with respect to cover 3, wherein the sealing cap 4 has a seal 12 (vertical circumferential seal) around a discharge opening 6 in the sealing cap 4, wherein the sealing cap 4 has a downwardly oriented flange configured for tight fitting engagement with the seal 12 (vertical circumferential seal) (see fig. 2 and annotated fig. 9 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the upper section to have a seal 12 (vertical circumferential seal) around the vent passageway and a downwardly oriented flange configured for tight fitting engagement with the seal 12 (vertical circumferential seal), as taught by Bratsch, in order to prevent product from getting between the upper and lower sections when using a straw.
PNG
media_image3.png
200
510
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 23: The combination discloses wherein the upper section further comprises the downwardly oriented vertical circumferential sealing flange, the vertical circumferential sealing flange configured for tight fitting engagement with the seal 12 (vertical circumferential seal) (see fig. 2 and annotated fig. 9 above).
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 1020190118238) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Meyers (US 20200339314).
Claim 29: Kim discloses the claimed invention except wherein the manual gripping surface comprises Tritan™ plastic.
Meyers teaches wherein a lid upper portion 100 and lid base 400 are formed of Tritan (see P. 0048 & 0063).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have made the lid out of Tritan, as taught by Meyers, in order to be BPA free, durable, and shatter resistant and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 1020190118238) and Mason (US 20240190640) as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Sterling (US 10850898).
Claim 21: The combination discloses the claimed invention except wherein the pinch surface further comprises a concave portion, the concave portion configured to receive a digit of a user for secure engagement while urging the first and second prongs radially inward, to facilitate separation of the upper section from the lower section.
Sterling teaches first pad 184 and second pad 186 which contour concavely (concave portion), wherein a user may use one finger in each of the first and second pads 184, 186 and squeeze the pads 184, 186 (see fig. 1 and C. 8 L. 27-42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the pinch surfaces to have an area which contours concavely (concave portion), as taught by Sterling, in order to provide a more user friendly finger location area to assist in proper placement of a finger and to better resist a users finger from slipping from the prongs.
Claim(s) 24 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 1020190118238) and Mason (US 20240190640) further in view of Bratsch (US 20100206875).
Claim 24: The combination discloses the upper body is a lower support.
The combination does not disclose wherein the upper body comprises (a) an upper cap, (b) an intermediate gasket, and (c) a lower support.
Bratsch teaches a sealing cap 4 which is twistable with respect to cover 3, wherein the sealing cap 4 has a seal 12 (intermediate gasket) around a discharge opening 6 in the sealing cap 4, wherein the sealing cap 4 has a downwardly oriented flange configured for tight fitting engagement with the seal 12 (vertical circumferential seal) (see fig. 2 and annotated fig. 9 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the upper section to include a seal 12 (intermediate gasket) around the vent passageway and a downwardly oriented flange configured for tight fitting engagement with the seal 12 (intermediate gasket), as taught by Bratsch, in order to prevent product from getting between the upper and lower sections when using a straw.
Jesberg teaches a cap having a jacket envelope (upper cap) made of aluminum and an inner cap made of plastic (see P. 0017)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the lower support with a jacket envelope (upper cap) made of aluminum, as taught by Jesberg, in order to provide additional strength to the upper body.
Claim 27: The combination discloses wherein the lower support includes an upper surface and circumferential vertically oriented sides, and wherein the jacket envelope (upper cap) extends over the upper surface and also downward to cover the circumferential vertically oriented sides.
Claim(s) 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 1020190118238) and Mason (US 20240190640) further in view of Bratsch (US 20100206875) as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Meyers (US 20200339314).
Claim 25: The combination discloses the claimed invention except wherein the upper cap comprises stainless steel.
Meyers teaches a lid upper portion 100 which is made of stainless steel (see P. 0063 and P. 0063).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have made the jacket envelope (upper cap) out of stainless steel, as taught by Meyers, in order to be stronger and rust resistant and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 26: The combination discloses wherein the jacket envelope (upper cap) comprises a drink well (see annotated partial fig. 3 above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20220151410, CN 112135548, US 8393487, US 20190352061, US 20220348384, US 20190352059, US 20230391517, and US 20120261416 are considered pertinent to claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLAN D STEVENS whose telephone number is (571)270-7798. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 12-8 ET.
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.
/ALLAN D STEVENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736