DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16th, 2013 is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Sheet
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 02/14/2025 and 06/03/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specifications
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 2, line 34 appears to mistakenly include the reference numeral for the retainer #120.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The claim has the number “120” in line 2, which appears to be the reference number for the claimed retainer. This number should be removed to bring the claim into line with the other claims presented. For purposes of examination, the number “120” in line 2 of claim 3 will be ignored.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC §112(b)
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.
Claims 7-11 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 7, 8, and 9, recite the limitations of “generally parallel” or “generally perpendicular. The term “generally parallel” or “generally perpendicular” are relative terms which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “generally parallel” or “generally perpendicular” are 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. Specifically, it is unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art whether “generally parallel” encompasses a deviation of 5 degrees, 20 degrees, or 45 degrees. Without a clear standard or objective metric provided in the specification to distinguish “generally parallel” structures from those that are merely angled or non-parallel, the metes and bounds of the claim are not distinct. Therefore, the terms “generally parallel” and “generally perpendicular” render the claims indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the “generally parallel” will be interpreted as being in parallel planes without overlap, and “generally perpendicular” will be interpreted as being at right angles.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "an angled ramp surface of the shelf" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation of “an angled ramp surface of the shelf” is indefinite because it infers that the “shelf” of claim 1 possesses an angled ramp surface without positively reciting said feature. Since a generic shelf does not inherently possess an angled ramp, this structure must be explicitly recited to provide proper antecedent basis. It is recommended that this feature be explicitly recited either in claim 10, or a separate claim upon which claim 10 depends.
Claim 11 is also rejected under 35 USC 112(b) due to its dependency upon rejection claim 10.
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 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 1-8 and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawaoka (US 4,039,118) in view of Richardson (US 4,714,191).
Regarding claim 1, Kawaoka teaches a dispensing assembly (Shown in figure 1), comprising:
a dispenser comprising a front panel (Figure 4, #20), a rear panel (Figure 4, #40), a top panel (Figure 4, #41), a bottom panel (Figure 4, #22), a first side panel (Figure 4, #50), and a second side panel (Figure 4, #30), and an attachment panel (Figure 4, #53), wherein the front panel, the rear panel, the top panel, the bottom panel, the first side panel, and the second side panel define an internal chamber configured to receive a stack of articles (Figures 2 and 4 illustrate that the panels form an internal chamber to receive articles);
a dispensing opening (Figure 1, #21), wherein at least a portion of the dispensing opening is formed in the front panel (Shown in figures 1 and 4), wherein a first side of the opening is defined by the first side panel and a second side of the opening is defined by the second side panel (Shown in figures 1, 2, and 4);
a shelf (Figures 1 and 2, #60) contained within the internal chamber (Figures 1 and 2 illustrate that the shelf is contained within the internal chamber); and
a retainer configured to maintain the stack of articles in a predetermined arrangement within the internal chamber (Figures 1 and 2 illustrate that the ramp #60 acts as a retainer), wherein the retainer is integrally formed from a single piece of material with the front panel, rear panel, first side panel, and second side panel (Figures 1 and 4 illustrate that the retainer is formed from a single piece of material with a front panel #60, rear panel #64, first side panel #62, and a second side panel #63).
Kawaoka does not specifically teach wherein a portion of the front panel forms a nose extending toward the dispensing opening to assist with one-by-one dispensing of articles from the stack through the dispensing opening.
Richardson teaches wherein a portion of the front panel forms a nose (Figure 3, #25 illustrates a tab forming a nose) extending toward the dispensing opening (Shown in figure 3) to assist with one-by-one dispensing of articles from the stack through the dispensing opening (Described in col 3, lines 45-55).
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 the dispensing opening of Kawaoka to incorporate the teachings of Richardson to include a nose or tab with the motivation of providing a mechanism by which the number of articles to be distributed is controlled or limited, as described by Richardson in col 1, lines 49-55 and col 2, lines 3-10.
Regarding claim 2, Kawaoka further teaches wherein the retainer extends in a vertical direction within the internal chamber relative to the top panel and the bottom panel (Figures 1 and 2 illustrate that the retainer extends in a vertical direction within the internal chamber relative to the top and bottom panels).
Regarding claim 3, Kawaoka further teaches at least one fold line between the retainer and one of the front panel, rear panel, first side panel, second side panel, and the attachment panel (Figure 4 illustrates at least one fold line between the retainer and the panels).
Regarding claim 4, Kawaoka further teaches the at least one fold line comprising two fold lines (Figure 4 illustrates at least two fold lines between #61/#64 and #33/#31).
Regarding claim 5, Kawaoka further teaches the retainer extending from a middle portion of one of the rear panel, first side panel, second side panel, and the attachment panel (Illustrated in figures 2 and 4).
Regarding claim 6, Kawaoka further teaches the retainer including a first retainer panel (Figure 4, #60) and a second retainer panel (Figure 4, #64) separated by a fold line (Shown in figure 4).
Regarding claim 7, Kawaoka further teaches wherein the first retainer panel and the second retainer panel extend generally parallel to each other (Figure 3 illustrates that the first and second retainer panels extend generally parallel to each other towards front panel #20).
Regarding claim 8, Kawaoka further teaches wherein the retainer extends generally parallel to the first side panel and the second side panel (Figures 1, 2, and 4 illustrate that the retainer extends generally parallel to the first and second side panels in a direction towards the front panel #20).
Regarding claim 10, Kawaoka further teaches wherein a bottom edge of the retainer is separated from an angled ramp surface of the shelf by a gap (Figure 2 illustrates a gap between a bottom edge of the retainer is separated from a ramp surface of the shelf by a gap - which is the thickness of #62).
Regarding claim 11, Kawaoka further teaches wherein the gap is in a range from about 0.1 inches to about 1 inch (Shown in figure 1).
Regarding claim 12, Kawaoka further teaches wherein the attachment panel is configured to couple one of the front panel, rear panel, first side panel, and second side panel to a respective other one of the front panel, rear panel, first side panel, and second side panel so the dispenser forms a hexahedron shape (Figure 1 illustrates that the blank forms a hexahedron when folded and attached via attachment panel #53).
Regarding claim 13, Kawaoka further teaches wherein at least one of the front panel, the rear panel, the top panel, the bottom panel, the first side panel, the second side panel, the retainer, and the attachment panel is constructed of carton cardboard stock, paperboard, heavy structural paper, container stock, corrugated paperboard, plastic coated paper, a plastic sheet, a wax-coated paper, or a combination thereof (Described in col 2, lines 19-32).
Regarding claim 14, the recitation of “wherein the articles comprise personal protective equipment in the form of a face shield, glasses, or goggles” is a statement of intended use that does not structurally distinguish the claimed apparatus from the prior art. The prior art dispenser of Kawaoka is fully capable of receiving and dispensing personal protective equipment without modification. Because the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, it is deemed that Kawaoka anticipates or renders obvious the limitation.
However, in the event that the applicant argues with the above; a further rejection of claim 14 in further view of Goldberg is provided below.
Regarding claim 15, Kawaoka further teaches a dust cover insert configured to cover an entirety of the dispensing opening (Figure 1a illustrates a cover #33 for covering an entirety of the dispensing opening. This feature is further described in col 2, lines 33-41).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawaoka in view of Richardson, and in further view of Goldberg (US 2021/0346204 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Kawaoka in view of Richardson does not specifically teach wherein the articles comprise personal protective equipment in the form of a face shield, glasses, or goggles.
Goldberg teaches wherein the articles comprise personal protective equipment in the form of a face shield, glasses, or goggles (Paragraph [0081] describes the packaging of face shields in a flat configuration conducive to shipment in a folded box).
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 Kawaoka in view of Richardson to incorporate the teachings of Goldberg to include the packaging of face shields with the motivation that a carton structure with a restricted dispensing capability (Kawaoka in view of Richardson) is an optimal shipping solution for disposable items such as face shields which can be stored in a flat configuration, as recognized by Goldberg in ¶ [0081].
Allowable Subject Matter
If the above rejections under 35 USC 112(b) are overcome, claim 9 would be objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Holley (US 7,374,076) teaches a package carton formed from a single blank (figure 11) with a trough (T) integrally formed for dispensing articles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB A SMITH whose telephone number is (571) 272-3974 and email address is Jacob.Smith@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30AM - 5:30PM.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at (571) 270-1926. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JACOB A SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 3731