Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to applicant’s amendment and remarks received on 06/12/2026. Claims 1 and 3-19 have been presented for examination. Claims 1 and 3-4 have been amended, claim 2 has been canceled, and new claims 12-19 have been added. Claims 1 and 3-19 have been examined.
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.
Claims 1, 3-6, 8-9, 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong (Pub. No.: 2023/0202736 A1) in view of Schmidt (Pub. No.: 2021/0012125 A1) and Ding (Pub. No.: 2025/0176571 A1).
1) In regard to claim 1, Wong discloses the claimed fresh-keeping structure, which can be combined with a container to form a sealed fresh-keeping device (fig. 1), comprising:
a body (fig. 1: 11), wherein the body is provided with a chamber (fig. 1: 14) inside for placing a preservative (fig. 2D: 14”), and the chamber communicates with an outside through an opening (fig. 2D: holes in the chamber); and
when the fresh-keeping structure is combined with the container (fig. 1 shows the fresh-keeping structure is combined with the container).
Wong does not explicitly disclose a Bluetooth module, wherein the Bluetooth module is provided on the body, a control module, wherein the control module is provided on the body, the control module includes at least one sensing unit, and the at least one sensing unit can detect environmental indexes in the container and outputs a sensing signal through the Bluetooth module, and the at least one sensing unit includes a temperature sensor, and the sensing signal includes an environmental temperature value.
However, Schmidt discloses it is known for a fresh-keeping device to have a Bluetooth module (¶0038), wherein the Bluetooth module is provided on the body (fig. 1), a control module (fig. 1: 102), wherein the control , is provided on the body (fig. 1), the control module includes at least one sensing unit, and the at least one sensing unit can detect environmental indexes in the container and outputs a sensing signal through the Bluetooth module (¶0046-¶0047).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the system of Wong to include a control module and Bluetooth module, as taught by Schmidt.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to use a known technique for monitoring the interior of the container.
Furthermore, Ding discloses it is known for a food preservation container to include a temperature sensor, and the sensing signal includes an environmental temperature value (¶0032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the structure of Wong to sense a temperature of the structure used to prevent the food from spoiling, as taught by Ding.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to monitor the environmental temperature value.
2) In regard to claim 3, Wong discloses the claimed fresh-keeping structure, which can be combined with a container to form a sealed fresh-keeping device (fig. 1), comprising:
a body (fig. 1: 11), wherein the body is provided with a chamber (fig. 1: 14) inside for placing a preservative (fig. 2D: 14”), and the chamber communicates with an outside through an opening (fig. 2D: holes in the chamber); and
when the fresh-keeping structure is combined with the container (fig. 1 shows the fresh-keeping structure is combined with the container).
Wong does not explicitly disclose a Bluetooth module, wherein the Bluetooth module is provided on the body, a control module, wherein the control module is provided on the body, the control module includes at least one sensing unit, and the at least one sensing unit can detect environmental indexes in the container and outputs a sensing signal through the Bluetooth module, and the at least one sensing unit includes a humidity sensor, and the sensing signal includes an environmental humidity value.
However, Schmidt discloses it is known for a fresh-keeping device to have a Bluetooth module (¶0038), wherein the Bluetooth module is provided on the body (fig. 1), a control module (fig. 1: 102), wherein the control , is provided on the body (fig. 1), the control module includes at least one sensing unit, and the at least one sensing unit can detect environmental indexes in the container and outputs a sensing signal through the Bluetooth module (¶0046-¶0047).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the system of Wong to include a control module and Bluetooth module, as taught by Schmidt.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to use a known technique for monitoring the interior of the container.
Furthermore, Ding discloses it is known for a food preservation container to include a humidity sensor, and the sensing signal includes an environmental humidity value (¶0032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the structure of Wong to sense a humidity of the structure used to prevent the food from spoiling, as taught by Ding.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to monitor the environmental humidity value.
3) In regard to claim 4, Wong discloses the claimed fresh-keeping structure, which can be combined with a container to form a sealed fresh-keeping device (fig. 1), comprising:
a body (fig. 1: 11), wherein the body is provided with a chamber (fig. 1: 14) inside for placing a preservative (fig. 2D: 14”), and the chamber communicates with an outside through an opening (fig. 2D: holes in the chamber); and
when the fresh-keeping structure is combined with the container (fig. 1 shows the fresh-keeping structure is combined with the container).
Wong does not explicitly disclose a Bluetooth module, wherein the Bluetooth module is provided on the body, a control module, wherein the control module is provided on the body, the control module includes at least one sensing unit, and the at least one sensing unit can detect environmental indexes in the container and outputs a sensing signal through the Bluetooth module, and the at least one sensing unit includes a oxygen sensor, and the sensing signal includes an environmental oxygen concentration value.
However, Schmidt discloses it is known for a fresh-keeping device to have a Bluetooth module (¶0038), wherein the Bluetooth module is provided on the body (fig. 1), a control module (fig. 1: 102), wherein the control , is provided on the body (fig. 1), the control module includes at least one sensing unit, and the at least one sensing unit can detect environmental indexes in the container and outputs a sensing signal through the Bluetooth module (¶0046-¶0047).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the system of Wong to include a control module and Bluetooth module, as taught by Schmidt.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to use a known technique for monitoring the interior of the container.
Furthermore, Ding discloses it is known for a food preservation container to include an oxygen sensor, and the sensing signal includes an environmental oxygen concentration value (¶0032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the structure of Wong to sense an oxygen of the structure used to prevent the food from spoiling, as taught by Ding.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to monitor the environmental oxygen value.
4) In regard to claim 5 (dependent on claim 1), Wong, Schmidt and Ding further disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 4.
Wong, Schmidt and Ding do not explicitly disclose the control module includes a controller, when the environmental oxygen concentration value detected by the oxygen sensor is higher than a predetermined oxygen concentration value, the control module controls the Bluetooth module to output a warning signal.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring system to have a control module includes a controller, when the environmental oxygen concentration value detected by the oxygen sensor is higher than a predetermined oxygen concentration value, the control module controls the Bluetooth module to output a warning signal.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the structure of Wong to transmit a warning signal when a predetermined oxygen value is detected.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to warn a user of a critical condition of the structure.
5) In regard to claim 6 (dependent on claim 1), Wong, Schmidt and Ding further disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 5.
Wong, Schmidt and Ding do not explicitly disclose a plurality of the environmental oxygen concentration values detected by the oxygen sensor in a plurality of predetermined time intervals are all higher than the predetermined oxygen concentration value, the control module controls the Bluetooth module to output the warning signal.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring system to have a plurality of the environmental oxygen concentration values detected by the oxygen sensor in a plurality of predetermined time intervals are all higher than the predetermined oxygen concentration value, the control module controls the Bluetooth module to output the warning signal.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the structure of Wong to transmit a warning signal when a predetermined oxygen value is detected.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to warn a user of a critical condition of the structure.
6) In regard to claim 8 (dependent on claim 1), Wong, Schmidt and Ding further disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a prompt device electrically connected to the control module, the prompt device is arranged outside the body or the container, the at least one sensing unit of the control module senses the environmental indexes in the container, and the at least one sensing unit displays the environmental indexes through the prompt device (Schmidt fig. 1: 130 and ¶0037).
7) In regard to claim 9 (dependent on claim 1), Wong, Schmidt and Ding further disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 8, wherein the prompt device can display an image prompt, a sound prompt or a light prompt based on the environmental indexes detected by the control module (Schmidt ¶0037).
8) In regard to claim 13 (dependent on claim 3), Wong, Schmidt and Ding further disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 3, further comprising a prompt device electrically connected to the control module, the prompt device is arranged outside the body or the container, the at least one sensing unit of the control module senses the environmental indexes in the container, and the at least one sensing unit displays the environmental indexes through the prompt device (Schmidt fig. 1: 130 and ¶0037).
9) In regard to claim 17 (dependent on claim 4), Wong, Schmidt and Ding further disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 4, further comprising a prompt device electrically connected to the control module, the prompt device is arranged outside the body or the container, the at least one sensing unit of the control module senses the environmental indexes in the container, and the at least one sensing unit displays the environmental indexes through the prompt device (Schmidt fig. 1: 130 and ¶0037).
Claims 7, 12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong (Pub. No.: 2023/0202736 A1) in view of Schmidt (Pub. No.: 2021/0012125 A1) and Ding (Pub. No.: 2025/0176571 A1) and further in view of Chang (Pub. No.: 2018/0139576 A1).
1) In regard to claim 7 (dependent on claim 1), Wong, Schmidt and Ding disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 1.
Wong, Schmidt and Ding do not explicitly disclose the control module includes a controller, and the control module controls the Bluetooth module to output the sensing signal at regular time intervals.
However, Chang discloses it is known for a control module including a controller, and program the control module to control a Bluetooth module to output a sensing signal at regular time intervals (¶0030).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the structure of Wong to transmit sensing signals at regular intervals, as taught by Chang.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to monitor the device at different time intervals, thereby, increasing the efficiency of the structure by reducing the amount of power used throughout the monitoring period.
2) In regard to claim 12 (dependent on claim 3), claim 12 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 7 and the references applied.
3) In regard to claim 16 (dependent on claim 4), claim 16 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 7 and the references applied.
Claims 10-11, 14-15 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong (Pub. No.: 2023/0202736 A1) in view of Schmidt (Pub. No.: 2021/0012125 A1) and Ding (Pub. No.: 2025/0176571 A1) and further in view of Besore (Pub. No.: 2018/0106523 A1).
1) In regard to claim 10 (dependent on claim 8), Wong, Schmidt and Ding disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 8.
Wong, Schmidt and Ding do not explicitly disclose the control module includes a controller electrically connected to the prompt device, a mobile device can transmit a content information to the controller through the Bluetooth module, and the controller controls the prompt device to display the content information.
However, Besore discloses it has been known to have a control module including a controller electrically connected to a prompt device, a mobile device can transmit a content information to the controller through the Bluetooth module, and the controller controls the prompt device to display the content information (fig. 1 and ¶0032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the structure of Wong to receive data from a mobile device to display content information.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Wong as described above in order to receive real-time data from devices in the area of the structure.
2) In regard to claim 11 (dependent on claim 10), Wong, Schmidt, Ding and Besore further disclose the fresh-keeping structure as claimed in claim 10, wherein the content information includes a content expiration date, when the content expiration date expires, the controller controls the prompt device to display an expiration warning signal (Besore ¶0058-¶0059).
3) In regard to claim 14 (dependent on claim 13), claim 14 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 10 and the references applied.
4) In regard to claim 15 (dependent on claim 14), claim 15 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 11 and the references applied.
5) In regard to claim 18 (dependent on claim 17), claim 18 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 10 and the references applied.
6) In regard to claim 19 (dependent on claim 18), claim 19 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 11 and the references applied.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the amended claims, based solely on the amendments to the claims, have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of the references including new prior art being used in the current new grounds of rejection for the newly added limitations to the claims. Furthermore, the well-known in the art statements in the above Office action is taken to be admitted prior art due to applicant failure to traverse the examiner’s official notice.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS J KING whose telephone number is (571)270-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00 - 2:00 EST.
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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/CURTIS J KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights