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.
Claims 1, 3, and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dewald 2014/0209769 in view of Iaslovits 4,860,895.
Regarding claim 1, Dewald discloses a retainer (Fig 1) for a beverage container with a stem, comprising:
a base portion (Fig 1, #4);
a recess (annotated Fig 1 below) formed in the base portion (Fig 1, #4) or (Fig 1, #3 & #4);
a retainer cap (Fig 1, #2) coupled to the base portion (Fig 1, #4) or (Fig 1, #3 & #4) and covering the recess (annotated Fig 1 below); and
a flexible retainer (Figs 1-3, #11 & #12) [0025] disposed in the recess (annotated Fig 1 below) between the base portion (Fig 1, #4) or (Fig 1, #3 & #4) and the retainer cap (Fig 1, #2) (i.e. For the interpretation of the base portion (Fig 1, #3 & #4) the flexible retainer (Figs 1-3, #11 & #12) is between the bottom base portion (Fig 1, #4) and the retainer cap (Fig 1, #2)) and adapted to hold the stem, wherein the flexible retainer (Figs 1-3, #11 & #12) includes a retainer slot (annotated Fig 3 below) (void between #11 & #12) that forms opposing finger like portions (Fig 3, #11 & #12).
PNG
media_image1.png
670
732
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
650
762
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Dewald has been discussed above but does not explicitly teach wherein the opposing finger like portions are adapted to flex outwardly away from one another when the stem is pushed into the retainer slot.
Iaslovits discloses a retainer (Fig 1) comprising a retainer slot (annotated Fig 1 below) and opposing finger like portions (Fig 1, #14 & #16) that are adapted to or capable of flexing outwardly away from one another when a stem of a beverage container is pushed into the retainer slot (annotated Fig 1 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
430
887
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the opposing fingers (DeWald, Fig 2, #11 & #12) of DeWald to be closer to each other so that they are capable of flexing outwardly away from each other when a stem of a beverage is pushed into the retainer slot (DeWald, annotated Fig 3 above) as taught by Iaslovits in order further secure the beverage container within the retainer or holder (Dewald, Fig 1) of Dewald at both the bottom of the beverage container and the stem of the beverage container.
In a second interpretation, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the opposing fingers (DeWald, Fig 2, #11 & #12) of DeWald with the opposing fingers (Iaslovits, Fig 1, #14 & #16) the substitution of one known set of opposing fingers for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 3, modified Dewald discloses the retainer wherein the recess (Dewald, annotated Fig 1 above) includes a relief portion (Dewald, annotated Fig 1 below) (left & right portion of the recess) adapted to allow the opposing finger like portions (Dewald, Fig 2, #11 & #12) or (Iaslovits, Fig 1, #14 & #16) flexible retainer to flex outwardly.
PNG
media_image4.png
771
716
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, modified DeWald discloses the retainer wherein the flexible retainer (Dewald, Fig 2, #11 & #12) (DeWald, [0025]) or (Iaslovits, Fig 1, #14 & #16) (Iaslovits, col 3, line16) is made of a flexible material.
Regarding claim 6, modified DeWald discloses the retainer wherein the base portion (Dewald, Fig 2, #3 & #4) includes a first slot (DeWald, Fig 1, #10) adapted to receive the stem.
Regarding claim 7, modified DeWald discloses the retainer wherein the retainer slot (DeWald, annotated Fig 3 above) (DeWald, void between #11 & #12) is substantially aligned with the first slot (DeWald, Fig 1, #10) and is adapted to receive the stem.
Regarding claim 8, modified DeWald discloses the retainer wherein the retainer cap (DeWald, Fig 1, #2) includes a cap slot (DeWald, Fig 1, #9) substantially aligned with the first slot (DeWald, Fig 1, #10) and the retainer slot (DeWald, annotated Fig 3 above) (DeWald, void between #11 & #12) and that is adapted to receive the stem.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dewald 2014/0209769 and Iaslovits 4,860,895; and further in view of Sorrells 8,439,200.
Regarding claim 2, modified Dewald has been discussed above but does not explicitly teach the retainer wherein the base portion is part of a table, a tray, or a storage container.
Sorrells discloses a retainer (Fig 1, #13) comprising a base portion (Fig 1, #13) that is part of a tray (Fig 1, #10) or a storage container (Fig 1, #10).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the retainer (DeWald, Fig 1) of modified DeWald in the tray (Sorrells, Fig 1, #10) of Sorrells in order to easily transport the retainer (DeWald, Fig 1) of modified DeWald from one location to another along with other beverage items.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dewald 2014/0209769 and Iaslovits 4,860,895; and further in view of Scharfe 9,132,932.
Regarding claim 2, modified Dewald has been discussed above but does not explicitly teach the retainer wherein the base portion is part of a table, a tray, or a storage container.
Scharfe discloses a retainer (Fig 1, #6, #10b, & #13) comprising a base portion (Fig 1, #10b) that is part of a tray (Fig 1, #1) or a storage container (Fig 1, #1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach the retainer (DeWald, Fig 1) of modified DeWald in a tray (Scharfe, Fig 1, #1) of Scharfe in order to easily transport the retainer (DeWald, Fig 1) of modified DeWald from one location to another along with other beverage items.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to all claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 DEVIN K BARNETT whose telephone number is (571)270-1159. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7:30pm.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 571-272-8227. 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.
/DEVIN K BARNETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631