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 .
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment / Request for Reconsideration-After Non-Final Rejection filed on March 16, 2026 wherein: claim(s) 1, 3, 8-9 were amended. Examiner notes amendments in claim(s) are directed to overcome rejections under 35 USC § 112 / 35 USC § 103. Therefore, claim(s) 1-12 are pending and will be examined.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olsen (U. S. Patent US5511656A) hereinafter OLSEN.
Regarding claim 1, OLSEN teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 below) a container carrier 14 for unitizing a plurality of containers 12, the container carrier 14 comprising:
a plurality of outer bands 34 and inner bands 60 forming an array of container receiving apertures 32 arranged in two or more transverse (L) pairs;
each outer band 34 of the plurality of outer bands 34 forming a convex container engaging portion L3-01 of each container receiving aperture 32;
each inner band 60 of the plurality of inner bands 60 forming a linear container engaging portion L3-02 of each container receiving aperture 32;
a central grasping aperture 56 positioned between each transverse (L) pair of container receiving apertures 32, the central grasping aperture 56 having opposite radiused ends L3-03 and a single of radiused finger hold L3-04 extending along each side L3-05;; and
an oblong stress relief cutout 80 positioned along each inner band 60 between each container receiving aperture 32 and each central grasping aperture 56.
OLSEN fails to teach inner bands 60 forming a concave container engaging portion L3-02 of each container receiving aperture.
OLSEN fails to teach a pair of radiused finger holds L3-04 extending along each side L3-05.
OLSEN fails to teach each radiused finger hold L3-04 extending toward the other and inwardly toward the central grasping aperture 56.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified linear container engaging portion L3-02 (to a concave container engaging portion L3-02) in the container carrier 14 of OLSEN to meet design requirements since a change of form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ47.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified number of radiused finger holds L3-04 (from single to pair) such radiused finger holds L3-04 extend toward the other (i.e., radiused finger holds L3-04) and inwardly toward the central grasping aperture 56 in the container carrier 14 of OLSEN since duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In reHarza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
PNG
media_image1.png
433
561
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
348
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
453
798
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
402
492
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
443
494
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
429
417
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, OLSEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN further teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 further comprising a finger aperture 58 positioned within the inner bands 60 on each side L3-05 the central grasping aperture 56.
Regarding claim 3, OLSEN (as applied to claim 2 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN fails to teach (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein the finger aperture 58 is oval shaped and tapered at one end and wider at an opposite end.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified form of finger aperture 58 in the container carrier 14 of OLSEN to conform an oval shaped (and tapered at one end and wider at an opposite end) to meet design requirements since a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ47.
Regarding claim 4, OLSEN (as applied to claim 3 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN further teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein the finger aperture 58 includes opposing radii L3-06 of different sizes wherein a larger radius L3-07 is positioned on a side facing the central grasping aperture 56.
Regarding claim 5, OLSEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN further teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein the oblong stress relief cutout 80 includes an outer edge L5-01 that follows a contour of the concave container engaging portion L3-02.
Regarding claim 6, OLSEN (as applied to claim 5 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN further teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein the oblong stress relief cutout 80 includes an inner edge L5-02 that is generally linear.
Regarding claim 7, OLSEN (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN further teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein each container receiving aperture 32 is engageable with a chime (FIG. 1) of a can 12.
Regarding claim 8, OLSEN teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) a container carrier 14 for unitizing a plurality of containers 12, the container carrier 14 comprising:
a plurality of outer bands 34 and inner bands 60 forming an array of container receiving apertures 32 arranged in two or more transverse (L) pairs;
each outer band 34 of the plurality of outer bands 34 forming a convex container engaging portion L3-01 of each container receiving aperture 32;
each inner band 60 of the plurality of inner bands 60 forming a linear container engaging portion L3-02 of each container receiving aperture 32;
a central grasping aperture 56 positioned between each transverse (L) pair of container receiving apertures 32, the central grasping aperture 56 having opposite radiused ends L3-03 and a single of radiused finger hold L3-04 extending along each side L3-05;
an oblong stress relief cutout 80 positioned along each inner band 60 between each container receiving aperture 32 and each central grasping aperture 56; and
a finger aperture 58 positioned within the inner bands 60 on each side L3-05 the central grasping aperture 56, the finger aperture 58 having opposing radii L3-06 of different sizes.
OLSEN fails to teach inner bands 60 forming a concave container engaging portion L3-02 of each container receiving aperture.
OLSEN fails to teach a pair of radiused finger holds L3-04 extending along each side L3-05.
OLSEN fails to teach each radiused finger hold L3-04 extending toward the other and inwardly toward the central grasping aperture 56.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified linear container engaging portion L3-02 (to a concave container engaging portion L3-02) in the container carrier 14 of OLSEN to meet design requirements since a change of form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ47.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified number of radiused finger holds L3-04 (from single to pair) such radiused finger holds L3-04 extend toward the other (i.e., radiused finger holds L3-04) and inwardly toward the central grasping aperture 56 in the container carrier 14 of OLSEN since duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In reHarza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 9, OLSEN (as applied to claim 8 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN fails to teach (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein the finger aperture 58 is oval shaped and tapered at one end and wider at an opposite end.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified form of finger aperture 58 in the container carrier 14 of OLSEN to conform an oval shaped (and tapered at one end and wider at an opposite end) to meet design requirements since a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ47.
Regarding claim 10, OLSEN (as applied to claim 8 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN further teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein the finger aperture 58 includes opposing radii L3-06 of different sizes wherein a larger radius L3-07 is positioned on a side facing the central grasping aperture 56.
Regarding claim 11, OLSEN (as applied to claim 8 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN further teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein the oblong stress relief cutout 80 includes an outer edge L5-01 that follows a contour of the concave container engaging portion L3-02.
Regarding claim 12, OLSEN (as applied to claim 11 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. OLSEN further teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 6 above) container carrier 14 wherein the
12. The container carrier 14 of Claim 11 wherein the oblong stress relief cutout 80 includes an inner edge L5-02 that is generally linear.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments / arguments regarding rejections under 35 USC § 112 of claim(s) 3-4, 9 in the reply filed March 16, 2026 have been considered and found persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument wherein OLSEN does not teach / suggest --inner bands 60-- form a “concave container engaging portion L3-02” is non persuasive. Furthermore, a change of form is considered as a matter of engineering choice and further shown in alternate embodiments within OLSEN (such as FIG. 6).
Regarding applicant’s argument wherein OLSEN does not teach a pair of --radiused finger holds L3-04-- is non persuasive since an artisan in the arts will consider duplication of parts (such --radiused finger holds L3-04--) producing an unexpected new result.
Regarding applicant’s argument wherein the examiner appears to mix features of different embodiments in OLSEN (such as those in FIG. 5 within FIG. 3) is non persuasive since embodiments are viewed as prior art wherein structures in FIG. 3 are furthered by structures in FIG. 5 (such --stress relief cutout 80--).
With respect to the art rejections, in accordance with MPEP 2111.01, during examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 70 USPQ2D 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Olsen et. al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20140262857A1): Teaches a “carrier” with similar attributes as the claimed invention.
Olsen (U. K. Patent Application Publication GB2076356A): Teaches a “carrier” with similar attributes as the claimed invention.
Olsen et al. (U. K. Patent Application Publication GB2064467A): Teaches a “carrier” with similar attributes as the claimed invention.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS JAVIER RODRIGUEZ MOLINA whose telephone number is (571) 272-8947. the examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, ANTHONY D. STASHICK can be reached on (571) 272-4561. 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.
/M.J.R.M./
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights