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
Claims 8-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/15/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 01/15/2026 is acknowledged.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rodriguez (5,447,248) in view of Smaldone (US 2016/0183704).
Claim 1
Rodriguez discloses an insulated container (10) comprising a top portion (defined by area of mouth 15) and a bottom portion (defined by area of the base of the bottle); an inner wall (14) extending from the top portion to the bottom portion; an outer wall (defined by wall 12) extending from the top portion to the bottom portion (see figures 2, 3 and 6), wherein the inner wall and the outer wall are coupled together and define a space (12a) between them (see , and wherein the inner wall and the outer wall define an aperture (16); a viewing window (20) disposed within the aperture (see figures 1, 2 and column 3 lines 4-9). Rodriguez discloses the insulated container is a liquid container (see abstract). Rodriguez does not explicitly disclose a cap coupled to the top portion. However, Smaldone discloses an insulated beverage container (100) comprising a container portion (defined by container showed in figure 2). Smaldone further discloses it is known the uses of a lid on beverage containers for sealing purposes of the beverage containers (see [0012]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rodriguez having a lid attached to the container portion as taught by Smaldone because it is well-known and common container closed by a lid for sealing purposes of the beverage container and/or to prevent accidental spillage of the liquid in the container.
Claim 2
Rodriguez further discloses the inner wall and the outer wall are formed together (see figure 2).
Claim 3
Rodriguez further discloses the space (12a) between the inner wall and the outer wall is filled with gas or air. Rodriguez discloses the space is evacuated through evacuation port (54) (see column 4 lines 8-13), therefore before evacuated the space is filled with gas.
Claim 4
Rodriguez further discloses the space between the inner wall and the outer wall is at a vacuum (see column 4 lines 9-13).
Claims 5 and 6
Rodriguez discloses the inner and outer wall formed a double wall vacuum insulated container, wherein the inner and outer walls are made from plastic (see column 2 lines 64-67 and column 3 lines 32-36). Rodriguez does not disclose the inner and outer walls formed from stainless steel. However, Smaldone discloses the insulated beverage container comprises a sidewall (130) formed of a double wall (135 and 137) of plastic or stainless-steel material (see [0011]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rodriguez having the inner and outer walls made from stainless-steel as taught by Smaldone because stainless steel is a known material used in insulated beverage containers.
Claim 7
Rodriguez further discloses the viewing window comprises a plurality of markers (42) (see figure 1).
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smaldone (US 2016/0183704) in view of Frye (4,138,027) (provided by the applicant) and Oronsky (US 2007/0125677).
PNG
media_image1.png
657
497
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 15
Smaldone discloses an insulated container (100) comprising a top portion and a bottom portion; an inner wall (137) extending from the top portion to the bottom portion; an outer wall (135) extending from the top portion to the bottom portion, wherein the inner wall and the outer wall are coupled together and define a sealed space (135) between them, and wherein the inner wall and the outer wall define an aperture (defined by open space formed by rim 127) (see figure above). Smaldone further discloses a cap/lid coupled to the top portion (see [0012]). Smaldone discloses the insulated container is a drinking container (see abstract). Smaldone does not disclose an outer shell coupled to the outer wall; an inner shell coupled to the inner wall, and a viewing window is formed through the outer shell, the aperture, and the inner shell. However, Regarding the outer and inner shells, Frye discloses an insulated container comprising an inner wall (1) comprising an inner shell (14) and an outer wall (4) comprising an outer shell (13), wherein the inner shell is a liner that provides resistance against corrosion (see column 3 lines 51-56), and the outer shell (13) is a protective jacket or casing (see column 3 lines 1-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Smaldone having inner and outer shells as taught by Frye for provide resistance to corrosion in the interior of the insulated container and to provide protection to the outer surface of the insulating container. Regarding the limitation of the viewing window, Oronsky discloses an insulated container (10) comprising a viewing window (22) formed though the insulated container (see figure 2 and [0049]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Smaldone having a viewing window as taught by Oronsky as modified to have visual access to the interior of the insulated container. After Smaldone and Frye are modified by Oronsky, the viewing window will be formed through the outer and inner shells, and the aperture.
Claim 16
Smaldone further discloses the inner wall and the outer wall are formed together (see figure 2).
Claim 17
Smaldone further discloses the space between the inner wall and the outer wall is filled with an insulating foam (140) (see [0014] and [0015]).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smaldone (US 2016/0183704), Frye (4,138,027) and Oronsky (US 2007/0125677) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Deng (US 2022/0234811).
Claims 18-20
Smaldone further discloses the inner and outer walls form a double-wall insulated metal/stainless steel container (see figure 2 and [0011]), wherein the space between the inner and outer walls is filled with insulating/foam material (see [0014] and [0015]). Smaldone does not disclose the space between the inner and outer walls is vacuum. However, Deng discloses an insulated container (80) comprising a container portion (82) including an inner and outer walls formed from stainless steel material (see [0060] and figure 6), and comprising a space between the inner and outer walls (see figure 6). Deng further discloses the uses of foam, air, or vacuum insulated are equivalent methods used for insulation (see [0061] and [0068]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Smaldone having the space between the inner and outer walls being vacuum insulated as taught by Deng since air, foam, or vacuum insulation are equivalent methods of insulating an open space formed by double wall of a container.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAFAEL A. ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 6pm.
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.
RAFAEL A. ORTIZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3736
/RAFAEL A ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736