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 .
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 21-27 and 31-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bean et al. (9,334,086) in view of Fenner Jr. (10,179,694). Bean et al. disclose a display container comprising an enclosure (100 or 300) having a generally enclosed interior for storing a botanical specimen (inside the enclosure), and a transparent viewing section (lens of the lid 116 or 316) extending overtop of the interior when the enclosure is upright for viewing of the botanical specimen from above when the botanical specimen is received in the interior to provide a generally unobstructed view of the botanical specimen when received therein. Bean et al. does not disclose an integrated lighting system. However, Fenner Jr. discloses a similar display container (10) for botanical specimens including an integrated lighting system including at least one LED (62) in the interior and upper portion of a housing (30) for illumination of the botanical specimen from above, and a control system (60-70) coupled to the at least one LED for controlling operation of the at least one LED. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display container of Bean et al. with an integrated lighting system including at least one LED in the manner of Fenner Jr. as claimed, as such a modification would predictably provide the display container of Bean et al. with a lighting source to improve viewing of the contained botanical specimen. The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
As to claim 22, Bean et al. disclose the transparent viewing section comprises a lens.
As to claim 23, Fenner Jr. discloses the one or more light sources that comprise a plurality (two bulbs 62) of light sources spaced apart from each other about the transparent viewing section in Fenner Jr. and in the combination.
As to claim 24, Fenner Jr. discloses the one or more light sources (62) comprise an array (defining a line) of light emitting diodes.
As to claim 25, Fenner Jr. discloses the array extends about (in adjacency) to the transparent viewing section in Fenner Jr. and in the combination.
As to claim 26, Fenner Jr. discloses an electronics module (circuit board 60) coupled to the LED lights for controlling operation thereof.
As to claim 27, Fenner Jr. further discloses the electronics module including at least one battery (66) for powering the LEDs.
As to claim 31, Fenner Jr. further discloses the electronics module including a power switch (70).
As to claim 32, the at least one light source of Bean et al. is within the interior of the disclosure.
As to claim 33, the at least one light source of Bean et al. is mounted adjacent to an upper end of the interior.
As to claim 34, Bean et al. disclose the enclosure has a top wall bounding the interior from above and a sidewall bounding the interior horizontally, the top wall comprising the transparent viewing section and at least a portion of the sidewall being generally transparent for viewing the botanical specimen from a side of the enclosure, and wherein the one or more light sources are below an upper periphery of the top wall and inboard of the sidewall.
As to claims 35 and 36, Bean et al. disclose the enclosure comprises a lower portion (106) and an upper portion (102) detachably and lockably mounted (via 108) to the lower portion and comprising the transparent viewing portion.
As to claim 37, Bean et al. disclose the lower portion comprises a container body and the upper portion comprises a lid.
As to claim 38, Bean et al. disclose a security connector portion (tether 240) for securely connecting the enclosure to a desired location.
As to claims 39 and 40, Bean et al. disclose a similar display container provided with scent ports (122) for sampling an aroma of the content.
Claims 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable the combination of Bean et al. and Fenner Jr. as employed in claim 27 above and further in view of Pena et al. (2014/037402). The combination of Bean et al. and Fenner Jr. does not disclose the battery to be rechargeable. However, Pena et al. disclose a display container (102) with LED (210) and battery (212) wherein the battery is rechargeable via power connector wires (214)(see paragraph 0040). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display container of the combination of Bean et al. and Fenner Jr. with its LED and battery combination provided with a rechargeable battery in the manner of Pena et al.as claimed, as such a modification would predictably provide battery that may be recharged and not need replacing.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the art as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Hardy et al. (9,706,857). The previous combination does not disclose the recharging of the battery being wireless. However, Hardy et al. disclose a display with LEDs and a battery (see column 27, lines 34-46) wherein the battery is rechargeable via wireless charging (see column 28, lines 9-52).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display container of the combination of Bean et al., Fenner Jr. and Pena et al. with its LED and battery combination provided with a wirelessly rechargeable battery in the manner of Hardy et al.as claimed, as such a modification would predictably provide battery that may be recharged and not need wiring to do so.
Applicant's arguments filed September 15, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not entirely persuasive. The terminal disclaimer overcomes any and all double patenting rejections. The arguments against the combination of Bean et al. and Fenner Jr. are not found convincing. The disposition of the LEDs in Fenner Jr. and in the proposed combination of Bean et al. and Fenner Jr. would not obstruct the content view from the side of the transparent display container. The base grounds of Bean et al. and Fenner Jr. are maintained.
The dependent claims 23-25, 27-31, 36 and 38 were not previously properly addressed under 103. Accordingly new grounds of rejection under 103 have been made.
This action has been made non-final.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYON P GEHMAN whose telephone number is (571) 272-4555. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday through Thursday from 7:30 am to 5:00 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, Orlando Aviles, can be reached on (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 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.
/BRYON P GEHMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Bryon P. Gehman
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3736
BPG
Prosecution Insights