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 .
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
Legal phraseology such as “means” (see lines 3, 5 and 8) should not be present therein. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
In Figures 2, 3 and 10, reference character 76 is directed toward two different elements. It is noted the specification indicates reference character 76 is directed to the dispensing rod of the pump 46 (see page 12, lines 10-11).
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 9, line 34, “pump 52” should be “pump 46”;
On page 12, line 15, “pump 76” should be “pump 46”;
On page 13, line 6, it appears “Figure 8” should be “Figure 6”;
On page 15, line 9, the specification indicates the first locking means 84 is located on the rotary shrink ring 22, however, Figure 6 and page 14, line 22 indicate the first locking means 84 is located on the cam ring 36. Clarification is needed;
On page 15, line 11, the specification indicates the second locking means 86 is located on the cam ring 36, however, Figure 7 and page 14, lines 25-26 indicate the second locking means 86 is located on the rotary shrink ring 22. Clarification is needed; and
Page 15, lines 5-6 indicated the first locking means is more resistant to aging than the second locking means, however, page 15, lines 11-13 seem to indicate the second locking means is more resistant to aging. Clarification is needed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 5, 7 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regard to claim 3, on lines 1-2, “a fluid product dispenser” should be “the fluid product dispenser” since the fluid product dispenser has already been defined in claim 1 (see lines 1-2). Similarly, on line 2, “a container” should be “the container”, on lines 2-3 “of fluid product” should be “of the fluid product”, on line 3, “an actuating part” should be “the actuating part” and on lines 3-4, “a dispensing pump” should be “the dispensing pump” since the container, fluid product, actuating part and dispensing pump have already been defined in claim 1 (see lines 1 and 5).
In regard to claim 5, similarly, on line 2, “a storage subassembly” should be “the storage subassembly” since the storage subassembly has already been defined in claim 3 (see line 1).
In regard to claim 7, on line 3, “the level” should be “a level” since the level has not been previously defined.
In regard to claim 8, it appears claim 8 should depend from claim 7 (as opposed to claim 5) since claims 1-6 are considered not to positively claim the dispensing pump while claim 8 appears to positively claim the dispensing pump and claim 7 provides the antecedent basis for “the dispensing pump” recited in claim 8.
Appropriate correction is required.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2017/211585 (as cited by the Applicant, hereinafter ‘585).
In regard to claim 1, the ‘585 reference discloses an actuating part 6 (see Figures 1 and 9) configured to be mounted in a dispenser 1 of a fluid product and to actuate a dispensing pump 8, the actuating part comprising:
at least one connecting means 21 (see Figure 9) for attachment to a container 13 of the dispenser;
a cavity (within element 20, see Figures 1 and 9) configured to receive the dispensing pump 8; and
a first cam means 7U, 7L (see Figure 9);
the actuating part being capable of being displaced when it is mounted in the dispenser according to an axial displacement, the axial displacement being obtained by transforming a rotational movement of the actuating part (actuating part 6 rotates with respect to actuating collar 4) by the first cam means, the axial displacement allowing an actuation of the dispensing pump for dispensing the fluid product.
In regard to claim 2, the first cam means are radial protrusions 7U, 7L configured to follow a trajectory 5 of the dispenser.
In regard to claim 3, the ‘585 device includes a storage subassembly configured to be mounted in the fluid product dispenser 1, the storage subassembly comprising the container 13 of the fluid product, the actuating part discussed above and the dispensing pump 8, the actuating part being attached to the container and allowing an actuation of the dispensing pump for dispensing the fluid product.
In regard to claim 5, the ‘585 reference discloses a fluid product dispenser 1 comprising:
the storage subassembly defined above;
a receptacle 2 configured to receive the storage subassembly;
a cam ring 4 mounted on the receptacle and movable in rotation relative to the actuating part 6;
the cam ring comprising a second cam means 5 cooperating with the first cam means of the actuating part of the storage subassembly so as to obtain the transformation of the rotational movement of the actuating part with respect to the cam ring into axial displacement of the actuating part from a low rest position towards a high dispensing position, the axial displacement allowing the actuation of the dispensing pump for dispensing the fluid product.
In regard to claim 6, the first cam means 7U, 7L are cam followers configured to follow a trajectory of the second cam means 5 of the cam ring 4.
In regard to claim 7, the ‘585 device includes a dispensing head 3 wherein the dispensing pump 8 is attached to the dispensing head 3 by an upper part 3C (see Figure 2) connected at a level of a dispensing orifice 3B.
In regard to claim 8, the dispensing pump is “wedged upwards” when the dispenser is used for the first time.
In regard to claim 9, the cam ring 4 comprises a cam trajectory 5
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘585.
In regard to claim 4, although the container 13 in the ‘585 device is not disclosed as being a flexible pouch, the examiner takes official notice that such dispensers commonly employ such flexible pouches in order to render the dispenser an “airless” dispenser. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made the container in the ‘585 device can be a flexible pouch type container in order to enable the dispenser to be an “airless” dispenser.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The Corbellini reference is cited as being directed to the state of the art as a teaching of a pump dispenser which is actuated by a rotary motion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J WALCZAK whose telephone number is (571)272-4895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30-4:00.
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, David Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
DJW
8/10/26
/DAVID J WALCZAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights