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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2, line 3, “the the second side edge”, should read “the second side edge”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
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 features below must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
Claim 1, lines 11-12, “when the first stackable tray is rotated about an axis perpendicular to a plane of the first stackable tray”.
Claim 7, lines 11-12, “when the first stackable tray is rotated about an axis perpendicular to a plane of the first stackable tray”.
Claim 8, lines 1-3, “wherein rotating the first stackable tray from the first orientation to the second orientation comprises rotating the first stackable tray 90 degrees from the first orientation.”
Claim 9, lines 1-3,” wherein rotating the first stackable tray from the first orientation to the second orientation comprises rotating the first stackable tray 180 degrees from the first orientation.”
Claim 12, lines 10-12, “when the first stackable tray is rotated about an axis perpendicular to a plane of the first stackable tray”.
Claim 18, lines 12-13, “when the first stackable tray is rotated about an axis perpendicular to a plane of the first stackable tray”.
No new matter should be entered.
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 15 is 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.
The term “maximal” in claim 15 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “maximal” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes maximal will be interpreted as the total area of the surface.
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.
Claims 1-21, so far as they are definite, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rorato et al. (US 6991108 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Rorato et al. teaches a packaging system, comprising: a first stackable tray (4) for storing one or more implements (wherein Rorato et al. teaches instrument trays), the first stackable tray (4) having a first surface (8) configured to receive the one or more implements (instruments) and a second surface opposite (7) the first surface, the first stackable tray (4) including: a first side edge (27) including a recessed portion (16) that is recessed below the first surface (8); one or more first interlocking features (11) indented into the first surface (8) of the first stackable tray (4) and one or more first interlocking features (11) indented into the recessed portion (16) of the first side edge (16); and one or more second interlocking features (12) protruding from the second surface (9) of the first stackable tray (4), the first stackable tray (4) being arranged to mate (Figure 4) with a second stackable tray (4) via engagement of the first interlocking features (11) or the second interlocking features (12) when the first stackable tray (4) is rotated about an axis perpendicular (wherein the user can orient the first tray perpendicularly before engaging it with the second tray) to a plane of the first stackable tray (4), from a first orientation (not shown) to a second orientation (figure 4), relative to the second stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 2, Rorato et al. further teaches a second side edge (27) of the first stackable tray (4) including a recessed portion (16) that is recessed below the first surface (8), wherein one or more first interlocking features (11) is indented into the recessed portion (16) of the second side edge (16). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 3, Rorato et al. further teaches one or more first interlocking features (11) indented (12 “as wedge-shaped recesses”) into the first surface (8) at the second side edge (16). (Fig. 3; Col. 6, Lines 12-13)
Regarding Claim 4, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the one or more first interlocking features (11) indented (“as wedge-shaped recesses”) into the first surface (8) include one or more first interlocking features (8) disposed at the first side edge (27, wherein the interlocking features are positioned around the periphery). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40; Col. 6, Lines 12-13)
Regarding Claim 5, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the one or more second interlocking features (12) protrude from the second surface (9) at one or both of the first side edge and the second side edge 27, wherein the interlocking features are positioned around the periphery). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40; Col. 5 Lines 7-9)
Regarding Claim 6, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the one or more second interlocking features (12) protrude from the second surface (9) directly opposite (as seen in Figure 3) first interlocking features (11) at the first surface (8). (Fig. 3; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 7, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the second stackable tray (4) is identical (as seen in Figure 3) to the first stackable tray (4), and wherein one or more second interlocking features (12) of the second stackable tray (4) are arranged to be aligned with and to engage the one or more first interlocking features (11) of the first stackable tray (4) when the first stackable tray (4) is rotated (wherein the user can orient the first tray perpendicularly before engaging it with the second tray) from the first orientation to the second orientation (Figure 3) and the second stackable tray (4) is stacked on the first stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 8, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein rotating the first stackable tray (4) from the first orientation to the second orientation (Figure 3) comprises rotating the first stackable tray (4) 90 degrees from the first orientation (wherein the user can orient the first tray perpendicularly 90 degrees before engaging it with the second tray). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 9, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein rotating the first stackable tray (4) from the first orientation to the second orientation (Figure 3) comprises rotating the first stackable tray (4) 180 degrees from the first orientation (wherein the user can orient the first tray perpendicularly 180 degrees before engaging it with the second tray). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 10, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the first and second side edges (27) are opposing side edges (as seen in Figure 3). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 11, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the recessed portion (16) at the first side edge (27) is flanked by a raised portion (38) at the first side edge (27), elevated above the recessed portion (16), and wherein another of the one or more first interlocking features (11) is indented (wherein it is adjacent) into the raised portion (38). (Figs. 3-4; Col. 6, Lines 34-40)
Regarding Claim 12, Rorato et al. teaches a packaging system comprising: a first stackable tray (4) for storing one or more implements (wherein Rorato et al. teaches instruments), the first stackable tray (4) having: a first surface (8) configured to receive the one or more implements (instruments);a second surface (9) opposite the first surface (8); one or more first interlocking features (11) indented into a first side edge (27) of the first stackable tray (4) at the first surface; and one or more second interlocking features (12) protruding from the first side edge (17) of the first stackable tray (4) at the second surface (9), the first stackable tray (4) arranged to mate with a second stackable tray (4) via the first interlocking features (11) or the second interlocking features (12) when the first stackable tray (4) is rotated about an axis perpendicular to a plane of the first stackable tray (4), from a first orientation (not shown) to a second orientation (Figure 3), relative to the second stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 13, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the first side edge (27) of the first stackable tray (4) includes at least two recessed portions (16) and at least two raised portions (38), with each recessed portion (16) being recessed below the first surface (8) and each raised portion (38) being elevated above the recessed portions (16), and wherein a first interlocking feature (11) of the one or more first interlocking features (11) is indented into each of the at least two recessed portions (11) and the at least two raised portions (38 as it’s adjacent). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40; Col. 6, Lines 34-40)
Regarding Claim 14, Rorato et al. further teaches further comprising a second side edge (27) of the first stackable tray (4) opposite the first side edge (27)) of the first stackable tray (4), wherein a pattern of the at least two recessed portions (11) and the at least two raised portions (38) at the first side edge (27) of the first stackable tray (4) comprises an inverse pattern of at least two recessed portions (11) and at least two raised portions (38) at the second side edge (27) of the first stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 15, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the one or more first interlocking features (11) each comprises a cavity having an open end (30 in Annotated Figure
PNG
media_image1.png
773
546
media_image1.png
Greyscale
3 below) , a floor (30 in Annotated Figure 3 below), and a peripheral side wall (30 in Annotated Figure 3 below) defining a depth of the cavity (as seen in Figure 3). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
PNG
media_image2.png
26
28
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
27
31
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image4.png
25
31
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
23
26
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
23
165
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 16, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the one or more second interlocking features (12) each comprises a protrusion (12) having a maximal surface and a peripheral side wall (33 in Annotated Figure 3 above) defining a height of the protrusion (as seen in Figure 3). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 17, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the first stackable tray (4) is sterile or sterilized (wherein Rorato et al. teaches “On the narrow sides 27 of each instrument tray 4 there are two locking holes 21 provided to accommodate the lower locking elements 12 (FIGS. 2 and 3). In the sterilisable embodiment of the invention the cover plate 17, bases 9 and the base areas 8 of the cavities 5 have ventilation holes 24, having preferably a diameter of 6 mm.”) (Figs. 2-3; Col. 5, 6-12)
Regarding Claim 18, Rorato et al. further teaches a packaging system, comprising: a first stackable tray (4) for storing one or more implements (wherein Rorato et al. teaches “instruments”), the first stackable tray (4) having a first surface (8) configured to receive the one or more implements (instruments) and a second surface (9) opposite the first surface (8), the first stackable tray (4) including: a first side edge (27) including at least one recessed portion (16) and at least one raised portion (38), with each recessed portion (16) being recessed below the first surface (8) and each raised portion (38) being elevated above the at least one recessed portion (16); a first interlocking feature (11) indented into each of the at least one recessed portion (16) and the at least one raised portion (38 as adjacent); and one or more second interlocking features (12) protruding from the second surface (9) of the first stackable tray (4), the first stackable tray (4) being arranged to mate with a second stackable tray (4) via engagement of the first interlocking features (11) or the second interlocking features (12) when the first stackable tray (4) is rotated about an axis perpendicular to a plane (wherein the user can orient the first tray perpendicularly before engaging it with the second tray) of the first stackable tray (4), from a first orientation (not shown) to a second orientation (Figure 3), relative to the second stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 19, Rorato et al. further teaches further comprising a resealable cover (17), the cover (17) having a plurality of first engagement features (12) on a first surface (9) of the cover (17) arranged to resiliently engage a plurality of second engagement features (11) on the first surface (8) of the first stackable tray (4) to seal the cover (17) to the first surface (8) of the first stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 20, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein the cover (17) includes at least one formed feature (wherein sidewalls can be seen around the top perimeter of the cover, forming a basin on top 14) arranged to secure the one or more implements (instruments) within the first stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Regarding Claim 21, Rorato et al. further teaches wherein each first interlocking feature (11) is colinear with a second interlocking feature (12) of the one or more second interlocking features (12) on a line parallel (as seen in Figure 3) to the axis perpendicular (as seen in Figure 3) to the plane of the first stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rorato et al. (US 6991108 B1), in view of Deutsch (US 5628443 A), and further in view of Martin et al. (US 2717621 A).
Regarding Claim 22, Platte, modified above, teaches all of the elements of the invention described in claim 42 above except; further comprising a belt configured to secure the first stackable tray to the second stackable tray, the belt including a belt body comprising a flat strap having one or more slots disposed thereon, a latch coupled to or integral with a first end of the belt body via a narrow neck, and a locking tab disposed at a second end of the belt body, the latch having a front end and at least one rear tab and the narrow neck defining a shoulder at the first end of the belt body.
Wherein Rorato et al. teaches a first stackable tray (4) and a second stackable tray (4). (Figs. 2-5; Col. 4, Lines 20-40)
Deutsch further teaches further comprising a belt (124) configured to secure a first container (126) to a second container (128).
It would have been prima facie obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the stacking trays as taught by Rorato et al., and provide for a securing belt as taught by Deutsch. Wherein through use of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results; one would be motivated to incorporate a securing belt for the trays, in order to further secure the trays during transit.
Martin et al. further teaches a belt body comprising a flat strap (1) having one or more slots (1d, 1e) disposed thereon, a latch (1c) coupled to or integral with a first end (1a) of the belt body (1) via a narrow neck (wherein 1c is a tapered neck), and a locking tab (1b) disposed at a second end (1b) of the belt body, the latch (1c) having a front end (1c) and at least one rear tab (1f) and the narrow neck (as seen in Figures 1-2, 4) defining a shoulder (as seen in Figure 2) at the first end (1a) of the belt body (1). (Figs. 1-4; Col. 1, Lines 67-72; Col. 2, Lines 1-54)
It would have been prima facie obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the stacking trays as taught by Rorato et al., modified above, and substitute a belt with a buckle for a belt with a latch and locking tab as taught by Martin et al. Wherein using simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; one would be motivated to substitute a belt with a buckle, for a belt with a latch and a locking body, to provide the user with a convenient way to secure the belt around the trays.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Bedman et al. (US 20160174675 A1), teaches a stackable carrying case.
Shapiro (US 20130026057 A1), teaches stackable trays.
Baltz et al. (US 20120193260 A1), teaches stackable trays.
Apps (US 4759451 A), teaches nesting trays.
Mollman et al. (US 4458815 A), teaches stacking trays.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R CAUDILL whose telephone number is (303)297-4349. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30-5:30 MT.
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, NATHAN JENNESS can be reached on (571) 270-5055. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/JUSTIN CAUDILL/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/NATHAN J JENNESS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3733
7 July 2026
Prosecution Insights