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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No.12,247,708. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the limitations of the instant application can be arrived at from the claim limitations of cited patent.
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 7-8,13-14 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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the actuating rod springs". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the actuating rod springs". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the ejection chamber". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the actuating springs". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 14 recited “the chemical light stick ejection port” whilst claim 1 recited “a light stick ejection port”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-2,10,14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brown (US 2012/0199604).
Claim 1, Brown discloses a tactical chemical light stick dispenser (Brown’s dispenser which dispenses solid bars of soap is fully capable of dispensing a light stick) comprising a dispenser housing comprising a light housing cover (112), a light stick status window (114), a light stick ejection port (fig.5; right above 104) located at the bottom dispenser housing (fig.3; the bottom is herein defined as the lower half portion of the dispensing depicted in fig.3), an actuating plunger (506), and an actuating button (104).
Although Brown does not disclose two actuating plungers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement a plurality of actuating plungers since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 2, Brown discloses a light stick loading port (fig.3; port covered by 112 to load articles to be dispensed), the actuating button (104) is connected to and transitions into the actuating plunger (508) which in turn is connected to and transitions into an actuating rod (504).
Although Brown does not disclose two actuating plungers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement a plurality of actuating plungers since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 10, Brown discloses one side of the dispenser housing forms a chemical light stick status window (114) that permits viewing of the number of remaining chemical light sticks for ejection (para.0019).
Claim 14, Brown discloses the actuating button (104) forces the chemical light stick to eject from the ejection chamber (fig.6; chamber wherein 502 pushes 106 out of dispenser) and out through the chemical light stick ejection port (fig.5; right above 104) and the actuating spring (508) restore the actuating button (104) back to the original ready position.
Although Brown does not disclose the actuating springs, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement a plurality of actuating springs since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claims 3-6,9,11-12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brown (US 2012/0199604) in view of Burnsed, Jr. et al. (US 10,577,197).
Claim 3, Brown discloses a chemical light stick housing loading port (fig.3; port covered by 112 that allows loading of articles to be dispensed).
Brown does not disclose a chemical light stick housing vertical spring chamber, a chemical light stick housing vertical spring.
Burnsed discloses a chemical light stick housing vertical spring chamber (fig.4; chamber wherein 40 reside), a chemical light stick housing vertical spring (40). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Brown with a chemical light stick housing vertical spring chamber, a chemical light stick housing vertical spring because such configuration is very well-known in the art for dispensing articles from the uppermost-top or lowermost-bottom of dispensing containers and does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claim 4, Brown discloses one side of the dispenser housing forms a chemical light stick status window (114) that permits viewing of the number of remaining chemical light sticks for activation and ejection.
Claim 5, Brown discloses the chemical light stick housing spring (508) exerts pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser and provides force to dispense a chemical light stick when the actuating button (104) is depressed.
Brown does not disclose the chemical light stick housing vertical spring exerts downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser and provides force to dispense a chemical light stick when the actuating button is depressed.
Burnsed discloses the chemical light stick housing vertical spring (40) exerts downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser and provides force to dispense a chemical light stick. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Brown with the chemical light stick housing vertical spring exerts downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser and provides force to dispense a chemical light stick when the actuating button is depressed because such configuration is very well-known in the art for dispensing articles from the uppermost-top or lowermost-bottom of dispensing containers and does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claim 6, Brown does not disclose the chemical light stick housing vertical spring maintains downward pressure on a vertical spring follower, which in turn, applies downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser that holds the light sticks in place down the dispenser housing all the way to the chemical light stick ejection chamber.
Burnsed discloses the chemical light stick housing vertical spring (40) maintains downward pressure on a vertical spring follower (54), which in turn, applies downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser that holds the light sticks in place down the dispenser housing all the way to the chemical light stick ejection chamber (see fig.4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Brown with the chemical light stick housing vertical spring maintains downward pressure on a vertical spring follower, which in turn, applies downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser that holds the light sticks in place down the dispenser housing all the way to the chemical light stick ejection chamber because such configuration is very well-known in the art for dispensing articles from the uppermost-top or lowermost-bottom of dispensing containers and does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claim 9, Brown discloses a chemical light stick housing loading port (fig.3; port covered by 112 that allows loading of articles to be dispensed).
Brown does not disclose a chemical light stick housing vertical spring chamber, a chemical light stick housing vertical spring, a vertical spring follower.
Burnsed discloses a chemical light stick housing vertical spring chamber (fig.4; chamber wherein 40 reside), a chemical light stick housing vertical spring (40), a vertical spring follower (54). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Brown with a chemical light stick housing vertical spring chamber, a chemical light stick housing vertical spring, a vertical spring follower because such configuration is very well-known in the art for dispensing articles from the uppermost-top or lowermost-bottom of dispensing containers and does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claim 11, Brown discloses the chemical light stick housing spring (508) exerts pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser and provides force to dispense a chemical light stick when the actuating button (104) is depressed.
Brown does not disclose the chemical light stick housing vertical spring that exerts downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser and provides force to dispense a chemical light stick when the actuating button is depressed.
Burnsed discloses the chemical light stick housing vertical spring (40) that exerts downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser and provides force to dispense a chemical light stick. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Brown with the chemical light stick housing vertical spring that exerts downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser and provides force to dispense a chemical light stick when the actuating button is depressed because such configuration is very well-known in the art for dispensing articles from the uppermost-top or lowermost-bottom of dispensing containers and does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claim 12, Brown does not disclose the chemical light stick housing vertical spring maintaining downward pressure on the vertical spring follower, which in turn, applies downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser that holds the light sticks in place down the dispenser housing all the way to the light stick ejection chamber.
Burnsed discloses the chemical light stick housing vertical spring (40) maintaining downward pressure on the vertical spring follower (54), which in turn, applies downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser that holds the light sticks in place down the dispenser housing all the way to the light stick ejection chamber (see fig.4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Brown with the chemical light stick housing vertical spring maintaining downward pressure on the vertical spring follower, which in turn, applies downward pressure on the chemical light sticks in the dispenser that holds the light sticks in place down the dispenser housing all the way to the light stick ejection chamber because such configuration is very well-known in the art for dispensing articles from the uppermost-top or lowermost-bottom of dispensing containers and does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AYODEJI H OJOFEITIMI whose telephone number is (571)272-6557. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 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, GENE CRAWFORD can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/AYODEJI H OJOFEITIMI/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights