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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1-9 are titled improperly because the titles of each figure should be clear and concise and read "Fig 1A" or "Figure 1A" and the view numbers must be larger than the numbers used for reference characters (see 37 CFR 1.84(u)).
Figures 1-9 are objected to for failing to comply with 37 C.F.R. 1.84(p)(3), which requires numbers, letters, and reference characters measure at least .32 cm. (1/8 inch) in height.
Sheets 1-8 of the drawing are objected to for containing extraneous matter in the form of the “docket number” in the top of each sheet in the margins.
Sheets 1-8 of the figures are objected to because the drawing sheets are numbered improperly. See 37 C.F.R. 1.84(t), which requires the sheets of drawings be numbered in consecutive Arabic numerals, starting with 1, within the sight as defined in paragraph (g) of this section. These numbers, if present, must be placed in the middle of the top of the sheet, but not in the margin. The numbers can be placed on the right-hand side if the drawing extends too close to the middle of the top edge of the usable surface. The drawing sheet numbering must be clear and larger than the numbers used as reference characters to avoid confusion. The number of each sheet should be shown by two Arabic numerals placed on either side of an oblique line, with the first being the sheet number and the second being the total number of sheets of drawings, with no other marking. In the instant case, the page numbers are in the margin, are smaller than the reference characters, and lack the oblique line.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “portion of the body separately connected to the paper bottom outer box” of claim 2 as currently presented only the lip appears to frictionally engage these things what is this other “portion”?; “the reinforcement portion connected to the paper bottom” of claim 3 element 311a points to a recessed area and not any structural reinforcement; must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Figure 9 is/are objected to because they contain cross-sectional views without indicating the plane upon which the sectional views are taken as required by 37 CFR 1.84 (h)(3). Furthermore, the blade is a solid piece but lacks hatching, which is improper.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1: recites “a paper bottom outer box”; however, this language is unclear. Is applicant claiming that there is an “outer box” made of “paper” or a box with “a paper bottom” or a “bottom outer box” for holding paper? For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “an outer box made of a paper”. This claim repeats similar issues with the terms “a paper inner holder”, “a paper floss bobbin”, “a paper upper holder”, and “a paper top cover”. It is respectfully recommended that for clarity applicant claim the structural components and then specify they are made of paper if this is what applicant means. For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “an inner holder made of paper”, “a floss bobbin made of paper”, “an upper holder made of paper”, and “a top cover made of paper”. Clarification or correction is requested.
Claim 2: this claim recites “the outer flange and a least a portion of the body are separately connected to the bottom outer box by friction fit only”; however, while the flange is connected to the bottom outer box, it is unclear what “portion of the body is separately connected to the bottom outer box” as required by the claim. Based on a review of the figures and disclosure, it is the flange that causes the entire inner holder to be friction fit to the bottom outer box so what is this “at least a portion of the body” and how is it “separately connected” by friction fit without the flange? It is unclear what exactly applicant is trying to claim. For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “the outer flange is connected to the bottom outer box by friction fit only thereby securing the body to the bottom outer box”. Clarification or correction is requested.
Claim 8: this claim recites “a third sidewall”; however, no first or second sidewalls or any sidewalls are required by claim 1, making the “third” language confusing because is this supposed to imply that two other sidewalls must also be present or is this claiming a singular sidewall? For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “an upper holder first sidewall”. This same issue appears in dependent claims 9-12. Clarification or correction is requested.
Claim 11: similar to claim 8, this claim recites “a fourth sidewall”, but none of the preceding claims require a first or a second sidewall making this language unclear for the reasons outlined above in regard to claim 8. For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “an upper holder second sidewall”. Clarification or correction is requested.
Claim 14: this claim recites “is formed by curing raw materials comprising bamboo”; however, this language is unclear because the claims are all drawn to device claims and not to a method of forming a device; however “formed by curing” is a method of manufacturing. It is unclear if applicant is attempting to claim a method of forming which would be improper for crossing statutory categories. For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “include bamboo”. Clarification or correction is requested.
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) 1, 2, 7, and 13, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ramirez (US 6705328) in view of Tarrson (US 4925073).
Claim 1: Ramirez discloses a box assembly (see Figs 4-5) comprising: a bottom outer box (112) made of paper/cardboard (Col 2, 50-60) with its interior forming a first accommodating cavity with a first top opening; and an inner holder (114a+114b) or housing. Ramirez indicates that the entire device housing can be made of paper/cardboard (Col 2, 50-60) and the office interprets this to mean that the inner holder(s) (114a+114b) can also be made of paper/cardboard (Col 2, 50-60). The inner holder made of paper comprises interior second accommodating cavities with second openings (117a+117b) with the second accommodating cavities holding rolls/reels of floss (115a+115b); each bobbin/reel of floss must rotate on a spindle (17, see Figs 3 & 4A-5B) in order to dispense the floss as illustrated in the reel arrangement (see Figs 4A & 5B) and the spindles disclosed by Ramirez are also made of paper/cardboard (Col 2, 50-60). The inner holders are also friction or press fit against each other into position in the bottom outer box (see Fig 4A). An upper holder (118) have an outlet opening (119) in communication with the second openings and the second accommodating cavities (see Fig 4A). The office interprets this passage (Col 2, 50-60) to mean the entire housing can be made of paper/cardboard (see Figs 4-5), so the upper holder is also made of cardboard/paper (Col 2, 50-60) and this upper holder (118) closes off the first opening (top of 112) and the second openings (117a+117b; see Fig 4A) and forces the floss from the second openings out of the outlet opening (119, see Fig 4A). A floss cutter (126) is disposed on the upper holder (see Figs 4-5); and there is also a top cover (120) that can be made of cardboard (Col 2, 50-60) and the top cover is flipped or pivoted relative to the bottom outer box (112; See Fig 4A) to switch between an open position and a closed position, wherein in the closed position, the paper top cover closes the first opening and forms an accommodating space with the bottom outer box (see Figs 4-5). The top cover is joined to the upper holder only by the bottom outer box and in the open position the top cover opens the first opening and the outlet opening and exposes the floss cutter (see Figs 4-5). Regarding the detachable limitation; anything is detachable with enough force.
Ramirez already discloses the bobbins of floss must rotate to function as described (See Fig 5A) and discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for explicitly stating that the various components of the second embodiment are all friction fit together like the first embodiment of Figs 1-3 and each floss reel being mounted on a cardboard bobbin/tube. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide all the components of the second embodiment with a snap/friction fitting as taught in the first embodiment, since it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art.
Modified discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for each floss reel being mounted on a cardboard bobbin/tube. Tarrson, however, teaches providing floss reels (24) mounted to cardboard tubes (Col 2, 55-67) in order to allow the floss reel/bobbin to easily rotate in the proper position in use. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing (or the time of invention if Pre-AIA ) to modify the floss container of modified Ramirez to include the reel of floss mounted to a rotating cardboard bobbin/tub in view of Tarrson since Tarrson teaches cardboard to be a known material for forming the rotatable bobbin of a reel of floss.
PNG
media_image1.png
478
306
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 2 and 7: the proposed modification is to provide the various separate components of the embodiment of Figs 4-5 of Ramirez with the snap/friction fitting arrangement of the embodiment of Figs 1-3 of Ramirez and the friction fitting of Figs 1-3 of Ramirez includes an outer flange (see annotations) that friction fits to the other component. Therefore, as best understood, modified Ramirez teaches the inner holder comprising a body and at least one outer flange joined to an exterior sidewall of the inner holder that frictionally joins the inner holder to the bottom outer box by the friction/snap fitting of this flange.
Claim 13: Modified Ramirez discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for the cutting blade being removable from the upper holder. Tarrson, however, teaches a cutting blade (84) that is detachable from an upper holder (44) via an avoidance opening in the upper holder (see Fig 6); the floss cutter comprises a first top clamping piece that carries the cutting blade (84), a vertical connecting piece (82, see Fig 6) that joins the first top clamping piece to a second bottom clamping piece and the connecting piece is disposed to penetrate into the avoidance opening and the first clamping piece is located on an outer side of the upper holder with the second clamping piece located on an inner side of the upper holder (see Fig 6). Tarrson teaches this is a known arrangement for attaching a cutting blade to a floss dispenser and the ability to remove the blade allows a user to replace the blade when it dulls. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing (or the time of invention if Pre-AIA ) to modify the floss dispenser of modified Ramirez by providing the blade with the leaf spring arrangement taught by Tarrson in order to allow a user to replace the blade.
Claim(s) 1-11, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ramirez (US 6705328) in view of Holmes (US 3693784).
-Claims 1 and 3-7: Ramirez discloses a box assembly (see Figs 4-5) comprising: a bottom outer box (112) made of paper/cardboard (Col 2, 50-60) with its interior forming a first accommodating cavity with a first top opening; and an inner holder (114a+114b) or housing. Ramirez indicates that the entire device housing can be made of paper/cardboard (Col 2, 50-60) and the office interprets this to mean that the inner holder(s) (114a+114b) can also be made of paper/cardboard (Col 2, 50-60). The inner holder made of paper comprises interior second accommodating cavities with second openings (117a+117b) with the second accommodating cavities holding rolls/reels of floss (115a+115b); each bobbin/reel of floss must rotate on a spindle (17, see Figs 3 & 4A-5B) in order to dispense the floss as illustrated in the reel arrangement (see Figs 4A & 5B) and the spindles disclosed by Ramirez are also made of paper/cardboard (Col 2, 50-60). The inner holders are also friction or press fit against each other into position in the bottom outer box (see Fig 4A). An upper holder (118) have an outlet opening (119) in communication with the second openings and the second accommodating cavities (see Fig 4A). The office interprets this passage (Col 2, 50-60) to mean the entire housing can be made of paper/cardboard (see Figs 4-5), so the upper holder is also made of cardboard/paper (Col 2, 50-60) and this upper holder (118) closes off the first opening (top of 112) and the second openings (117a+117b; see Fig 4A) and forces the floss from the second openings out of the outlet opening (119, see Fig 4A). A floss cutter (126) is disposed on the upper holder (see Figs 4-5); and there is also a top cover (120) that can be made of cardboard (Col 2, 50-60) and the top cover is flipped or pivoted relative to the bottom outer box (112; See Fig 4A) to switch between an open position and a closed position, wherein in the closed position, the paper top cover closes the first opening and forms an accommodating space with the bottom outer box (see Figs 4-5). The top cover is joined to the upper holder only by the bottom outer box and in the open position the top cover opens the first opening and the outlet opening and exposes the floss cutter (see Figs 4-5). The paper inner holders each have two parallel interior sidewalls (see Fig 4A) that define the second accommodating cavity(ies) with the floss rolls mounted rotatably within the cavity(ies) (see Figs 4-5). The first (left side of Fig 4A) each comprise a reinforcement portion/protrusion (see annotations) connected by snap/friction fitting with the bottom outer box (see annotations) and this reinforcement portion is formed by the protrusions protruding from the first inner sidewalls towards the paper bottom outer box to form the friction/snap fitting arrangement. These reinforcements, or protrusions, are located close to the second opening(s) (see annotations).
Ramirez already discloses the rolls of floss must rotate to function as described (See Fig 5A) and discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for each floss roll being mounted on a rotating cardboard bobbin/tube and explicitly stating that the various components of the second embodiment are all friction fit together like in the first embodiment of Figs 1-3. -However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the floss dispenser of Ramirez by providing all the components of the second embodiment of Ramirez with a snap/friction fitting as taught by Ramirez in the first embodiment, since it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art. The proposed modification would result in the top cover and upper holder (and inner holder(s) if applicant disagrees the protrusions illustrated by Ramirez in Fig 4A constitute snap/friction fits) being friction fit with the bottom outer box via the disclosed snap/friction fit flanges of the embodiment of Figs 1-3.
PNG
media_image2.png
482
461
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Modified Ramirez discloses the floss roll(s) mounted rotatably within the inner holder(s) and discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for details about how the bobbins of floss are rotatably mounted within the inner holder(s), specifically mounting the rolls of floss to rotating carboard bobbins mounted in mounting holes/recesses formed in sidewalls of the inner holder(s).
Holmes, however, teaches a box with a rotating bobbin (14, see Figs 8-9) that carries a roll of cord/floss (40, see Figs 10-12). The box comprises an inner holder (11+36) comprising an accommodating cavity (interior of 11, see Figs 12-13) with a cardboard, or paper, (Col 4, 30-40) floss bobbin (14) rotatably connected to, and supported by, two parallel sidewalls of the inner holder (see Figs 10-13). Two ends of the paper bobbin are rotatably connected to mounting holes (32 & 33) in the two parallel sidewalls of the inner holder (see Figs 7-10). Holmes teaches that the bobbin (14) and the inner holder can both be made of cardboard, which is paper, (Col 4, 30-40). In other words, Holmes teaches mounting rotating reels of thread or floss on cardboard/paper bobbins (14) and mounting the cardboard bobbing rotatably within mounting holes of parallel sidewalls of the inner holder is a known way of storing and dispensing floss/cords in the art in 1972. Holmes teaches that in 1972 it was old and well known to rotatably mount cords/floss on a cardboard bobbin with the cardboard bobbin rotatably supported by mounting holes formed in parallel sidewalls of a cardboard inner holder. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing (or the time of invention if Pre-AIA ) to modify the floss dispenser of modified Ramirez by providing the bobbin of cardboard and with the rotating mounting arrangement taught by Holmes to be old and well known in the packaging art in order to allow smooth rotation during dispensing.
Claim 2: the protrusions of the inner holders constitute “flanges” or “outer flanges” that are connected to the bottom outer box by snap/friction fitting (see annotations).
PNG
media_image3.png
294
461
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 8-9: Modified Ramirez discloses the invention of claim 1 and Ramirez further discloses the upper holder (118) in one embodiment to be a flat piece with a top wall (see Fig 4) and flat sidewalls extending therefrom forming a thickness of the upper holder. These sidewalls are inserted into the second accommodating cavity (see Fig 4A). Modified Ramirez discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for the upper holder sidewalls extending down from the top wall to form a third accommodating cavity. In another embodiment, however, Ramirez discloses the upper holder (20) that carries the floss outlet opening (21) comprising a first top wall that carries the floss outlet opening (21) joined to a first upper holder skirt forming a first upper holder sidewall extending down from the first top wall thereby forming a third accommodating cavity (see Fig 2). In other words, Ramirez teaches it to be an obvious matter of design choice to form the upper holder as a flat piece or a piece with a height a skirt extending down from the top surface. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dispenser of modified Ramirez by providing the upper holder of the embodiment of Figs 4-5 with a downward extending skirt forming upper holder sidewalls that form a third accommodating cavity in view of the embodiment of Figures 1-3, since it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art. The proposed modification is to provide the upper holder of Figs 4-5 with downwardly extending walls/a skirt like in the embodiment illustrated in Figure 2. The proposed modification for claim 1 already requires a friction/snap fitting between the upper holder and the bottom outer box so the proposed modification would also teach these limitations.
Claim 10: Modified Ramirez discloses the invention of claim 8 and Ramirez further discloses the top wall of the upper holder having a recess (opening in 125) with the outlet opening (119) on one side of the recess (see Fig 5A) and the floss cutter (126) on an opposite side of the recess (see Fig 5A).
Claim 11: Modified Ramirez discloses the invention of claim 8 and Ramirez further discloses the top cover (120) including a fourth sidewall and a second top wall (see Figs 4-5) and a living hinge, or paper connector (note, if the entire device is made of paper/cardboard as disclosed in Col 2, 50-60, then the living hinge would also be made of paper, thereby forming a “paper connector”). The living hinge connector is connected to the bottom outer box and the top cover (see Figs 4-5). So since Ramirez teaches these limitations and the proposed modifications do not modify the living hinge, modified Ramirez teaches these limitations.
Claim(s) 12, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ramirez (US 6705328) in view of Holmes (US 3693784) as applied to claim 11 above and further in view of Aledo (US D548887).
Claim 12: Modified Ramirez discloses the top cover being hinged and friction fit to the bottom outer box and discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for a front surface of the top wall have a sloped portion opposite the hinged side of the floss dispenser with this sloped portion/wall covered by the top cover when the dispenser is closed. Aledo, however, teaches a floss dispenser including a lid (see Figs 5-6) hinged to a bottom outer box and an upper holder including a sloped portion/front wall carrying the cutter and that is covered by the top cover when the dispenser is closed (see Figs 1-5). In other words, Aledo teaches that it is known to provide floss dispensers having an upper portion joined to an outer bottom box and carrying a supply of floss with a sloped upper wall that is covered by the hinged top cover joined to the outer bottom box. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing (or the time of invention if Pre-AIA ) to modify the floss dispenser of modified Ramirez by providing it with a sloped front wall on the upper portion top wall and extending away from the hinged side of the upper portion as taught by Aledo to be well known in the art of floss dispensers as an obvious matter of design choice.
Claim(s) 13, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ramirez (US 6705328) in view of Holmes (US 3693784) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Chiang (US 5806666).
Claim 13: Modified Ramirez discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for the cutting blade being removable from the upper holder. Chiang, however, teaches a floss dispenser (see Fig 1) comprising a bottom outer box (11+10) with an upper portion (17+20, see Fig 1) and a top cover (12) hinged to the bottom outer box. The upper portion includes a detachable cutting blade (21) that is removably attached to a pair of avoidance openings (22A & 22B) in the upper portion (see Figs 2-3). While not illustrated, the rail and groove arrangement illustrated allowing the floss cutter to be removably received in the avoidance openings via a non-illustrated protrusion on the bottom of the cutter (21). The floss cutter comprises a first top clamping piece joined to a connecting piece and a second clamping piece (the connecting piece would be the portion received in the slot (22A) and the second clamping portion would be the portion that is larger than the slot to clamp the cutter in place as described). So the floss cutter includes a top first clamping piece (illustrated portion of 21), a connecting piece and a second clamping piece with the cutting blade attached to the top first clamping piece (see Figs 1-3). The first clamping piece is located on an outer side of the upper holder (see Figs 2-3) and the second clamping piece is located on an inner side of the upper holder with the connecting piece disposed to penetrate through the avoidance openings (see Figs 1-3). Chiang teaches this removable blade arrangement in order to allow a user to mount the floss for right or left handed use (see abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing (or the time of invention if Pre-AIA ) to modify the floss dispenser of modified Ramirez by providing it with two avoidance openings and the detachable blade arrangement taught by Chiang mounted to these avoidance openings in view of Chiang in order to allow a user to make the dispenser for left or right handed use depending on the user.
Claim(s) 14, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ramirez (US 6705328) in view of Holmes (US 3693784) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Tidnam (WO 2025056910).
Claim 14: Modified Ramirez discloses the invention of claim 1 and Ramirez discloses the entire device can be made of cardboard or of other types of suitable materials (Col 2, 50-60). Modified Ramirez discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for the cardboard being made of 35% bamboo pulp and 65% bagasse pulp (also known as sugar cane pulp). Tidnam, however, teaches that bamboo and bagasse pulp cardboards are widely recyclable and biodegradable materials used in packaging and specifically states that providing 65% bamboo and 35% bagasse is a known proportion as is providing 60-70% bamboo and 30-40% bagasse (Page 1, 25-35). In other words, Tidnam teaches using bamboo and bagasse composites for use in cardboard packaging because it is a biodegradable material making it better for the environment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing (or the time of invention if Pre-AIA ) to modify the cardboard floss dispenser of modified Ramirez by providing it of 35% bamboo pulp and 65% bagasse in view of Tidnam in order to ensure the packaging is more biodegradable and environmentally friendly as taught by Tidnam.
Modified Ramirez discloses the invention essentially as claimed except for reversing the proportions of bagasse pulp and bamboo pulp. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to reverse the composition since both bagasse and bamboo are known biodegradable materials so choosing to make the cardboard of 100% bamboo, 100% bagasse, 35/65 in favor of bamboo or 35/65 in favor of bagasse would all be obvious matters of design choice for a biodegradable material and since the applicant has not disclosed that this particular percentage of bagasse and bamboo solves any problem or is for a particular reason. It appears that the claimed invention would perform equally well with any biodegradable cardboard.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer Gill whose telephone number is (571)270-1797. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10:00am-5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Eric Rosen, can be reached on 571-270-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JENNIFER GILL/
Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/NICHOLAS D LUCCHESI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights