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
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 16 March 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Applicant’s respectfully disagree with the Examiner’s foundation for the Restriction Requirement as set forth in the Office Action and argue that the restriction should be reconsidered and withdrawn. This is not found persuasive because applicant has not argued any deficiencies of the Restriction Requirement.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 2 in the reply filed on 16 March 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Applicant’s respectfully disagree with the Examiner’s foundation for the Restriction Requirement as set forth in the Office Action and argue that the restriction should be reconsidered and withdrawn. This is not found persuasive because applicant has not argued any deficiencies of the Restriction Requirement.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 11-13 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 16 March 2026.
Claims 8-10 and 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 16 March 2026.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: outer wall.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a bottom tray” of lines 4-5 should be corrected to “the bottom tray”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a bottom tray” of line 2 should be corrected to “the bottom tray”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2, 6 and 14-16 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the container" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the bottom" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 is led to be indefinite as it is unclear if “the bottom” is a newly recited structure or refers back to the “bottom tray” of claim 1. In light of the original disclosure and in order to apply art the claim will be interpreted as the latter.
The limitation of claim 6 that “the top tray and the boom are shaped to fit within the shipping container” is led to be indefinite. From claim 1, the top tray and bottom tray constitute part of the shipping container. If the top tray and bottom tray are part of the shipping container how can they be within the shipping container? As claim 1 recites that the inner enclosure is positioned with the cavity of the outer enclosure and in order to apply art, the limitation will be interpreted as if it read “the top tray and the bottom tray are shaped to fit within the outer enclosure”.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the outer wall" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 is led to be indefinite as it is unclear if “the outer wall” is a newly recited structure or refers back to the “outer enclosure” of claim 1. In light of the original disclosure and in order to apply art the claim will be interpreted as the latter.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the sidewalls" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The limitation of the sidewalls in claim 14 is led to be indefinite as it is unclear if these are newly recited structures or refer back to the side walls of line 2. In light of the original disclosure and in order to apply art the limitation will be interpreted as the latter.
Claims 15 and 16 recites the limitation "The system" in lines 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miessler (US 1840677).
Claim 1: Miessler discloses a shipping container, comprising: an outer enclosure having a cavity; and an inner enclosure positioned within the cavity of the outer enclosure and having a lower inner end member 4 (top tray), an upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray) and a shell 8 (nested enclosure) positioned in between the lower inner end member 4 (top tray) and the upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray), the shell 8 (nested enclosure) having a payload area to receive a payload (see annotated fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
577
720
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 5: Miessler discloses wherein the lower inner end member 4 (top tray) or the upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray) has angularly disposed webs 6 (one or more centering guides) that receive the shell 8 (nested enclosure) and centers the shell 8 (nested enclosure) in a center of the lower inner end member 4 (top tray) or the upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray) (see fig. 4).
Claim 6: Miessler discloses wherein the lower inner end member 4 (top tray) and the upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray) are shaped to fit within the outer enclosure and interface with each wall of a plurality of walls of the outer enclosure when inserted into the cavity of the outer enclosure (see annotated fig. 4 above).
Claim 7: Miessler discloses wherein the lower inner end member 4 (top tray) or the upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray) has one or more legs 7 (handles) to allow a user to grasp or hold the lower inner end member 4 (top tray) or the upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray) (see fig. 3-4).
Claim 14: Miessler discloses a shipping container comprising: an outer enclosure having side walls and a base, wherein the side walls and the base define a cavity in the outer enclosure; and a lid attachable to the side walls of the outer enclosure to cover the cavity in the outer enclosure; an inner enclosure disposed inside the cavity and configured to provide a payload area for a payload within the inner enclosure (see annotated fig. 4 above).
Claim 15: Miessler discloses wherein the inner enclosure comprises a plurality of panels, the plurality of panels defining the payload area.
Claim 16: Miessler discloses wherein the inner enclosure comprises a lower inner end member 4 (top tray), an upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray) and a shell 8 (nested enclosure) positioned in between the lower inner end member 4 (top tray) and upper inner end member 4 (bottom tray), the shell 8 (nested enclosure) defining the payload area (see fig. 4).
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6-7, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Groff (US 10301097).
Claim 1: Groff discloses a shipping container, comprising: an RCS case 12 (outer enclosure) having a cavity; and an inner enclosure positioned within the cavity of the outer enclosure and having a top support insert 14b (top tray), a bottom support insert 14a (bottom tray) and a protective air cell 16 (nested enclosure) positioned in between the top support insert 14b (top tray) and the bottom support insert 14a (bottom tray), the protective air cell 16 (nested enclosure) having a payload area to receive a payload (see fig. 1).
Claim 3: Groff discloses wherein the protective air cell 16 (nested enclosure) has locking tabs 74a, 74b, 96a, 96b (one or more leaf springs) that are angled inward and that are capable of contacting and stabilize some payload within the protective air cell 16 (nested enclosure) (see fig. 1 and 3).
Claim 4: Groff discloses wherein the locking tabs 74a, 74b, 96a, 96b (one or more leaf springs), the top support insert 14b (top tray) and the bottom support insert 14a (bottom tray) are nonmetallic (see C. 5 L. 11-17 and C. 3 L. 11-21).
Claim 6: Groff discloses wherein the top support insert 14b (top tray) and the bottom support insert 14a (bottom tray) are shaped to fit within the RCS case 12 (outer enclosure) and interface with each wall of a plurality of walls of the RCS case 12 (outer enclosure) when inserted into the cavity of the RCS case 12 (outer enclosure) (see C. 3 L. 62-64).
Claim 7: Groff discloses wherein the top support insert 14b (top tray) or the bottom support insert 14a (bottom tray) has flanges 30 (one or more handles) to allow a user to grasp or hold the top support insert 14b (top tray) or the bottom support insert 14a (bottom tray) (see fig. 1).
Claim 14: Groff discloses a shipping container comprising: an RCS case 12 (outer enclosure) having side walls 20a, 20b, 22a, 22b and a bottom wall 24 (base), wherein the side walls 20a, 20b, 22a, 22b and the bottom wall 26 (base) define a cavity in the RCS case 12 (outer enclosure); and a top wall 24 (lid) attachable to the side walls 20a, 20b, 22a, 22b of the RCS case 12 (outer enclosure) to cover the cavity in the RCS case 12 (outer enclosure): an inner enclosure disposed inside the cavity and configured to provide a payload area for a payload within the inner enclosure (see fig. 1).
Claim 15: Groff discloses wherein the inner enclosure comprises side walls 34a, 34b, 36a, 36b (plurality of panels), the side walls 34a, 34b, 36a, 36b (plurality of panels) defining the payload area (see fig. 1).
Claim 16: Groff discloses wherein the inner enclosure comprises a top support insert 14b (top tray), a bottom support insert 14a (bottom tray) and a protective air cell 16 (nested enclosure) positioned in between the top support insert 14b (top tray) and the bottom support insert 14a (bottom tray), the protective air cell 16 (nested enclosure) defining a payload area (see fig. 1).
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsuyuki (US 20120305551).
Claim 1: Tsuyuki discloses a shipping container, comprising: an outer box 2 (outer enclosure) having a cavity; and an inner enclosure positioned within the cavity of the outer box 2 (outer enclosure) and having an upper cushion 13 (top tray), a lower cushion 12 (bottom tray) and a bag 6 (nested enclosure) positioned in between the upper cushion 13 (top tray) and the lower cushion 12 (bottom tray), the bag 6 (nested enclosure) having a payload area to receive a payload (see fig. 2B).
Claim 2: Tsuyuki discloses wherein the upper cushion 13 (top tray) has opening portions 13d (opening) to allow some container to be placed within the bag 6 (nested enclosure) (see fig. 1 and 2B).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. JP 2015081097 is considered pertinent to claim 1 and US 20040094448 is considered pertinent to an opening in a top tray within an outer enclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLAN D STEVENS whose telephone number is (571)270-7798. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 12-8 ET.
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.
/ALLAN D STEVENS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights