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 .
Response to Amendment
The status of the claim(s) is as follows:
Claims 11 have been amended,
Claims 12-17 were previously presented,
Claims 1-10 have been canceled, and
Claims 18-20 were and still are withdrawn from further consideration (due to the restriction requirement)
Therefore, claims 11-17 are currently pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/07/2026 is being considered by the examiner.
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 17 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.
As to claim 17, applicant recites “the blister of at least one of the blister packages has a lid stock partially attached thereto”, which is indefinite due to their dependency to claim 11 and claim 11 further amended the claim with new limitation “the blister packages being without a lidstock or a lens” as two limitation clearly contradict with each other. For the purpose of examination, examiner will still examine claim 17 base on the content applicant claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alayon Rivera et al (11,584,577) in view of Alulis et al (7,845,077)
As to claim 11, Alayon Rivera discloses a contact lens blister packaging (65) arrangement (Figure 7), comprising: a plurality of blister packages (65 shows empty contact lens assembly 61), each blister package comprising a blister having a well (73) and an aperture (69) disposed apart from the well (as shown in Figure 7), the blister packages being without a lid stock or a lens (column 9 lines 32-44 and Figure 7 shows empty contact lens 65 without lidstock and lens within), the assembly further discloses at least one fastener (63) that extending through each of the aperture of the blister package (Figure 7). However, Alayon Rivera does not specifically disclose the fastener being a loop forming a closed shape, the loop extending through each of the apertures. Nevertheless, Alulis discloses a group of similar articles (Figure 5) each comprises an aperture (26) at one end of the article, a loop (50) forming a closed shape (Figure 5), the loop extending through each of the apertures (Figure 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fastener for contact lens blister of Alayon Rivera with a loop form that is capable of extending through the apertures as taught by Alulis in order to collect a group of contact lens blister package together for easier to carry without the need of a box and able to simply carry the assembly with a finger.
As to claims 12-13, Alayon Rivera as modified further discloses that the loop comprises one segment and a circular shape, but does not disclose the loop comprises two segments connected together and the two segments are L-shaped. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the loop of Alayon Rivera as modified with the loop comprises two segments connected together and the two segments are L-shaped because the selection of the specific number of segment and the shape of the loop such as disclosed by Alayon Rivera as modified or as claimed would have been an obvious matter of design choice inasmuch as the resultant structures will work equally well and inasmuch as applicant's specification does not state that using these specific distance as claimed solves any particular problem or yields any unexpected results.
As to claims 14-15, Alayon Rivera as modified by Alulis further discloses the loop comprises only a single segment (50), the segment having two ends (54), the ends connectable to one another (via 58).
As to claim 16, Alayon Rivera further discloses the fastener (63) can be made from at least one thermoplastic or plastic material and can be made from the same material as the base member (same thermoplastic material, column 5, lines 6-12 of Alayon Rivera).
As to claim 17, as best understood, Alayon Rivera as modified further discloses the blister of at least one of the blister packages has as lid stock partially attached thereto, and wherein the lid stock consist of a same plastic material as the blister (column 11, lines 61-67 to column 12, lines 1-2, which teaches the lid stock attached to the blister package and teaches foil, but column 4, lines 3-10 further teaches that the sealing member/sealing lid can be removably lid (plastic lid or plastic member), which the blister and the lid can both be made with recyclable plastic material).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 11-17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 CHUN HOI CHEUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-5702. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM-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, 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.
/CHUN HOI CHEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights