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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with C.F.R 1.84(u) because view numbers must be preceded by the abbreviation "FIG." MPEP 608.02 V.
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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King (US 7942287).
Regarding claim 1, King discloses, A closure (12) comprising: a first closure portion including: a top wall portion (See annotated fig. below);an annular skirt portion (See annotated fig. below) depending from the top wall portion, the annular skirt portion including an internal thread formation for mating engagement with an external thread formation of a container (Fig. 2) , the thread formation being a helical formation with a plurality of alternating bumps and valleys, , the width of the plurality of bumps and the plurality of valleys being measured in a direction perpendicular to the top wall portion; and a second closure portion including: a tamper-evident band (66) depending from and being partially detachably connected to the annular skirt portion by a frangible connection (62).
King does not appear to disclose, each of the plurality of bumps having a greater width than the plurality of valleys.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified King to have each of the plurality of bumps having a greater width than the plurality of valleys motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
PNG
media_image1.png
445
627
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, King discloses, the closure is a one-piece (Fig. 3; Col. 6; lines 7-8).
Regarding claim 3-4, King does not appear to disclose, the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 0.03 to about 0.11 inch and wherein the width of the plurality of valleys is from about 0.01 to about 0.05 inch and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 0.05 to about 0.11 inch and wherein the width of the plurality of valleys is from about 0.02 to about 0.04 inch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified King to have width of the plurality of bumps is from about 0.03 to about 0.11 inch and wherein the width of the plurality of valleys is from about 0.01 to about 0.05 inch and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 0.05 to about 0.11 inch and wherein the width of the plurality of valleys is from about 0.02 to about 0.04 inch, motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 5-6, King does not appear to disclose the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 1.5 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 2 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified King to have width of the plurality of bumps is from about 1.5 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 2 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys, motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 7-8, King does not appear to disclose the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 2 to about 3 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys or the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 3 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified King to have width of the plurality of bumps is from about 2 to about 3 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys or the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 3 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys, motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Claim(s) 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sendel (US 4461394) in view of Edie (US 20130319968).
Regarding claim 9, Sendel discloses, A closure (2) comprising: a first closure portion including: a top wall portion (6);an annular skirt portion (10) depending from the top wall portion, the annular skirt portion including an internal thread (See annotated fig. below) formation for mating engagement with an external thread formation of a container (Fig. 2) , the thread formation being a helical formation, a plurality of alternating bumps (18) and valleys (16), the width of the plurality of bumps and the plurality of valleys being measured in a direction perpendicular to the top wall portion.
Sendel does not disclose, the thread formation is discontinuous and forms a plurality of individual segments, a second closure portion including: a tamper-evident band depending from and being partially detachably connected to the annular skirt portion by a frangible connection .
Edie disclose, a cap (10) the thread formation (24) being a helical formation that is discontinuous and forms a plurality of individual segments, a second closure portion including: a tamper-evident band (32) depending from and being partially detachably connected to the annular skirt portion by a frangible connection (para 26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sendel to have thread formation is discontinuous and forms a plurality of individual segments, a second closure portion including: a tamper-evident band depending from and being partially detachably connected to the annular skirt portion by a frangible connection as taught by Edie for the purpose of “facilitates venting of gas” (para 25) and to prevent unauthorized access to the package.
As a result of medication, Sendel-Edie would have individual segments including a plurality of alternating bumps and valleys
Sendel does not appear to disclose, each of the plurality of bumps having a greater width than the plurality of valleys.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sendel to have each of the plurality of bumps having a greater width than the plurality of valleys motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 10, Sendel as modified discloses individual segment including bumps but does not disclose, the individual segments includes at least three bumps.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sendel to have the individual segments includes at least three bumps as it is considered a matter of design choice motivated by an obvious change in size , having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. By changing the size of segment, one of ordinary skill in the art can control how many bumps can be incorporated into each segment, including three bumps as claimed. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 11-12, Sendel does not appear to disclose, the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 0.03 to about 0.11 inch and wherein the width of the plurality of valleys is from about 0.01 to about 0.05 inch and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 0.05 to about 0.11 inch and wherein the width of the plurality of valleys is from about 0.02 to about 0.04 inch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sendel to have width of the plurality of bumps is from about 0.03 to about 0.11 inch and wherein the width of the plurality of valleys is from about 0.01 to about 0.05 inch and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 0.05 to about 0.11 inch and wherein the width of the plurality of valleys is from about 0.02 to about 0.04 inch, motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 13-15, Sendel does not appear to disclose the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 1.5 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 2 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys or the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 3 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys..
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sendel to have width of the plurality of bumps is from about 1.5 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 2 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys or the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 3 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys., motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 16, and 17, Sendel discloses, A package comprising: a container (4) having a neck portion (20) defining an opening (Claim 1) , the container having an external thread formation (22) on the neck portion; and a closure being configured for fitment to the neck portion of the container for closing the opening, the closure including a first closure portion, the first closure portion including a top wall portion (6) and an annular skirt portion (10), the annular skirt portion depending from the top wall portion, the annular skirt portion including an internal thread formation for mating engagement with an external thread formation of a container, the thread formation being a helical formation with a plurality of alternating bumps (18) and valleys (16), the width of the plurality of bumps and the plurality of valleys being measured in a direction perpendicular to the top wall portion,
Sendel does not disclose, a second closure portion including: a tamper-evident band depending from and being partially detachably connected to the annular skirt portion by a frangible connection and the thread formation is discontinuous and forms a plurality of individual segments, each of the individual segments including the plurality of alternating bumps and valleys.
Edie disclose, a cap (10) the thread formation (24) being a helical formation that is discontinuous and forms a plurality of individual segments, a second closure portion including: a tamper-evident band (32) depending from and being partially detachably connected to the annular skirt portion by a frangible connection (para 26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sendel to have the second closure portion including a tamper-evident band depending from and being partially detachably connected to the annular skirt portion by a frangible connection and the thread formation is discontinuous and forms a plurality of individual segments as taught by Edie to prevent unauthorized access to the package for releasing gas (para 25).
Sendel does not appear to disclose, each of the plurality of bumps having a greater width than the plurality of valleys.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sendel to have each of the plurality of bumps having a greater width than the plurality of valleys motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 18-20, Sendel does not appear to disclose the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 1.5 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 2 to about 3 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys or the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 3 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys..
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sendel to have width of the plurality of bumps is from about 1.5 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys and the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 2 to about 3 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys or the width of the plurality of bumps is from about 3 to about 4 times greater than the width of the plurality of valleys., motivated by an obvious change in size, having a predictable outcome absent a teaching of an unexpected result. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANJIDUL ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7670. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 -5:00.
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, 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.
/SANJIDUL ISLAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
/ORLANDO E AVILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3736