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 amendment filed 8/24/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-22 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 1-22, have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the references being used in the current rejection. Note discussion of Foreign Publication JPH0248586 by Unknown, below.
Applicant's arguments filed 8/24/2026, regarding the 35 USC 112 and 102/103 rejections of Claims 1-22 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for these reasons:
Regarding Applicant’s assertion that the limitation “optionally, a foil material disposed between the inner and outer lining materials” in claim 20 does not render the claim indefinite (Page 6) the examiner disagrees, pointing out that the saying “optionally” before “ a foil material disposed between the inner and outer lining materials”, makes this portion of the claim indefinite as “optionally” indicates that what comes after it does not necessarily need to be considered part of the scope of the claim. The word “Optionally” either needs to be removed as the word optional is very unclear or the entire limitation “Optionally, a foil material disposed between the inner and outer lining materials” needs to be removed.
Regarding Applicant’s assertion that Kaczmarek’s annotated figures do not show the fold lines that cause the material to fold inwardly (Page 7-8) the examiner disagrees, pointing out that Figures very obviously show the fold lines. Additionally please see Fig 4 of Kaczmarek. The fold lines cause the material to fold inwards
Regarding Applicant’s assertion that the amendments regarding foam, inner and outer layer and stitching (Page 7-8) the examiner points out that Seiders below teaches these limitations.
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.
Claims 20-21 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites “optionally, a foil material disposed between the inner and outer lining materials”. It is unclear what the scope of the claim includes.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1, 13-14, 16-19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Foreign Publication EP4484319 by Kaczmarek (Here forth “Kaczmarek”) in view of Foreign Publication JPH0248586 by Unknown (Here forth “Unknown”) and US Publication 2022/0161986 by Seiders (Here forth “Seiders”).
Regarding claim 1, Kaczmarek discloses a collapsible container (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek), comprising:
a body comprising a bottom surface, a front surface, a back surface, a left surface, and a right surface, wherein the bottom surface, front surface, back surface, left surface, and right surface collectively define an interior cavity (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek, the body surfaces define an interior cavity within);
wherein the front and back surfaces each comprises a first set of fold lines (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek);
wherein the left and right surfaces each comprises a second set of fold lines (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek);
wherein the first and second sets of fold lines cause material forming each of the front surface, back surface, left surface, and right surface to fold inwardly when the body is collapsed from an open configuration to a closed configuration (Fig 4 of Kaczmarek, the collapsible container can collapse and fold inward); [Not taught: wherein the body further comprises a first snap hinge disposed on the left surface and a second snap hinge disposed on the right surface, each snap hinge disposed between a pair of parallel, vertical fold lines of the second set of fold lines;
wherein each of the front surface, back surface, left surface, and right surface comprises an inner lining, an outer lining, and a foam layer disposed between the inner lining and the outer lining], and wherein the first and second sets of fold lines are formed by stitching (Para 34 of Kaczmarek) [Not taught: that extends through the inner lining, the foam layer, and the outer lining].
PNG
media_image1.png
533
918
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek
Kaczmarek does not expressly disclose snap hinges attached to the left and right surface.
Unknown disclose a similar container that teaches wherein the body further comprises a first snap hinge disposed on the left surface and a second snap hinge disposed on the right surface, each snap hinge disposed between a pair of parallel, vertical fold lines of the second set of fold lines (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Unknown, when taught to Kaczmarek and applied to the left and right surfaces of Kaczmarek are between the fold lines taught by Kaczmarek).
PNG
media_image2.png
279
780
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Unknown
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kaczmarek and Unknown before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the collapsible container of Kaczmarek to replace the hinge of Kaczmarek with a first snap hinge disposed on the left surface and a second snap hinge disposed on the right surface, as taught by Unknown, to advantageously secure the lid to the container and also be able to hinge the lid open on one of two sides when necessary.
Kaczmarek does not expressly disclose an outer lining , inner lining, and foam material with the stitching extending through the inner and outer layers.
Seiders discloses a similar flexible container that teaches wherein each of the front surface, back surface, left surface, and right surface comprises an inner lining, an outer lining, and a foam layer disposed between the inner lining and the outer lining (Para 65 of Seiders, the outer lining 501, foam 502 and inner lining 500); wherein the first set of fold lines comprises a stitching that extends from the outer or inner lining material through the foam material and to the other of the outer or inner lining material (Para 70-71 of Seiders).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kaczmarek and Seiders before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the collapsible container of Kaczmarek to have an outer and inner lining with foam in between and stitched together, as taught by Seiders, to advantageously provide insulation to the contents within and keep the insulation and linings attached together to keep them intact.
Regarding claim 13, Kaczmarek further discloses wherein the second set of fold lines on the left surface comprises a line segment that extends across the left surface from a left side to a right side of the left surface (Examiner annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek, one of the fold lines can see seen extending across from left to right across the right surface which is exactly the same as the left surface).
Regarding claim 14, Kaczmarek further discloses wherein the second set of fold lines on the left surface defines third and fourth triangular-shaped regions, wherein the third triangular-shaped region is disposed adjacent the front surface and wherein the fourth triangular-shaped region is disposed adjacent the back surface (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek).
Regarding claim 16, Kaczmarek further discloses wherein the second set of fold lines on the left surface comprises:
a sixth line segment and a seventh line segment (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek);
wherein the sixth line segment extends from a bottom, left portion near the back and bottom surfaces to a middle region of the left surface (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek);
wherein the seventh line segment extends from a top, left portion near the back surface and opposite the bottom surface to the middle region of the left surface (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek);
a eighth line segment and an ninth line segment (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek);
wherein the eighth line segment extends from a bottom, right portion near the bottom and front surfaces to the middle region of the left surface (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek); and
wherein the ninth line segment extends from a top, right portion near the front surface and opposite the bottom surface to the middle region of the left surface (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek; the sixth line segment and the seventh line segment intersect at a third apex, and wherein the eighth line segment and the ninth line segment intersect at a fourth apex; a tenth line segment extending between the third apex and the fourth apex).
Regarding claim 17, Kaczmarek further discloses wherein the sixth line segment and the seventh line segment intersect at a third apex, and wherein the eighth line segment and the ninth line segment intersect at a fourth apex (Examiner annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek above).
Regarding claim 18, Kaczmarek further discloses wherein the second set of fold lines further comprises:
a tenth line segment extending between the third apex and the fourth apex (Examiner annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek above).
Regarding claim 19, Kaczmarek further discloses further comprising a top surface coupled to at least one of the front surface, back surface, left surface, or right surface, wherein the top surface is configured to move from an open configuration permitting access to the interior cavity to a closed configuration restricting access to the interior cavity (Examiner Annotated Fig 8 of Kaczmarek).
Regarding claim 22, Kaczmarek further discloses wherein the first and second sets of fold lines bias the material of the front, back, left and right surfaces to fold inwardly toward one another when the body is collapsed from the open configuration to the closed configuration (Fig 4 of Kaczmarek).
Claims 2-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaczmarek, Unknown, and Seiders in view of US Patent 2791367 issued to Mefford (Here forth “Mefford”).
Regarding Claim 2, Kaczmarek does not expressly disclose the first set of fold lines being triangular.
Mefford discloses a similar collapsible container that teaches wherein the first set of fold lines on the front and back surfaces defines first and second triangular-shaped regions, wherein the first triangular-shaped region is disposed adjacent the left surface and wherein the second triangular-shaped region is disposed adjacent the right surface (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford; a hypotenuse of the first triangular-shaped region is disposed along the left surface, and wherein a hypotenuse of the second triangular- shaped region is disposed along the right surface; the first triangular-shaped region comprises an isosceles triangle, and wherein an apex of the first triangular-shaped region is disposed away from the hypotenuse of the first triangular-shaped region and the left surface).
PNG
media_image3.png
637
711
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Fig 2 of Mefford
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 collapsible container to include the teachings of Mefford providing the triangular fold line shape of the front and back surfaces as triangular rather than the fold lines shapes of Kaczmarek. Such a modification involves only a change in shape which provides no change in function (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B). Further Applicant has not disclosed criticality for the claimed shape.
Regarding claim 3, Kaczmarek as modified includes all of the limitations including wherein a hypotenuse of the first triangular-shaped region is disposed along the left surface, and wherein a hypotenuse of the second triangular- shaped region is disposed along the right surface (Examiner Annotated Fig 2 of Mefford).
Regarding claim 4, Kaczmarek as modified includes all of the limitations including wherein the first triangular-shaped region comprises an isosceles triangle, and wherein an apex of the first triangular-shaped region is disposed away from the hypotenuse of the first triangular-shaped region and the left surface (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford).
Regarding claim 5, Kaczmarek does not expressly disclose the multiple fold lines on the front surface.
Mefford disclose a similar collapsible container that teaches wherein the first set of fold lines on the front surface comprises:
a first line segment and a second line segment (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford);
wherein the first line segment extends from a bottom, left portion near the bottom and left surfaces to a middle region of the front surface (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford);
wherein the second line segment extends from a top, left portion near the left surface and opposite the bottom surface to the middle region of the front surface (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford);
a third line segment and a fourth line segment (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford);
wherein the third line segment extends from a bottom, right portion near the bottom and right surfaces to the middle region of the front surface (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford); and
wherein the fourth line segment extends from a top, right portion near the right surface and opposite the bottom surface to the middle region of the front surface (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford; the left side of the front surface, the first line segment, and the second line segment define a first triangular-shaped region, and wherein the right side of the front surface, the third line segment, and the fourth line segment define a second triangular-shaped region; the left side of the front surface defines a hypotenuse of the first triangular-shaped region, and wherein the right side of the front surface defines a hypotenuse of the second triangular-shaped region; the first line segment and the second line segment intersect at a first apex, and wherein the third line segment and the fourth line segment intersect at a second apex; a fifth line segment extending between the first apex and the second apex; the fifth line segment connects the first apex to the second apex).
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 collapsible container to include the teachings of Mefford providing the triangular fold line shape of the front and back surfaces as triangular rather than the fold lines shapes of Kaczmarek. Such a modification involves only a change in shape which provides no change in function (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B). Further Applicant has not disclosed criticality for the claimed shape.
Regarding claim 6, Kaczmarek as modified includes all the limitations including wherein the left side of the front surface, the first line segment, and the second line segment define a first triangular-shaped region, and wherein the right side of the front surface, the third line segment, and the fourth line segment define a second triangular-shaped region (See the detailed description of the rejection of claim 5; Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford).
Regarding claim 7, Kaczmarek as modified includes all the limitations including wherein the left side of the front surface defines a hypotenuse of the first triangular-shaped region, and wherein the right side of the front surface defines a hypotenuse of the second triangular-shaped region (See the detailed description of the rejection of claim 5; Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford).
Regarding claim 8, Kaczmarek as modified includes all the limitations including wherein the first line segment and the second line segment intersect at a first apex, and wherein the third line segment and the fourth line segment intersect at a second apex (See the detailed description of the rejection of claim 5; Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford).
Regarding claim 9, Kaczmarek as modified includes all the limitations including wherein the first set of fold lines on the front surface further comprises:
a fifth line segment extending between the first apex and the second apex (See the detailed description of the rejection of claim 5; Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford).
Regarding claim 10, Kaczmarek as modified includes all the limitations including wherein the fifth line segment connects the first apex to the second apex (See the detailed description of the rejection of claim 5; Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford).
Regarding claim 11, Kaczmarek further discloses wherein the first set of fold lines are formed on the front surface by stitching the fold lines on the material that forms the front surface (Para 34 of Kaczmarek).
Regarding claim 15, Kaczmarek does not expressly disclose wherein the hypotenuse of the third and fourth triangular regions are disposed along front surface and back surface.
Mefford discloses a similar collapsible container that further discloses wherein a hypotenuse of the third triangular-shaped region is disposed along the front surface, and wherein a hypotenuse of the fourth triangular- shaped region is disposed along the back surface (Examiner annotated Fig 2 of Mefford, the back surface has the same fold line pattern as the front surface).
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 collapsible container to include the teachings of Mefford providing the triangular fold line shape of the front and back surfaces as triangular with hypotenuses disposed along edge of front and back surfaces rather than the fold lines shapes of Kaczmarek. Such a modification involves only a change in shape which provides no change in function (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B). Further Applicant has not disclosed criticality for the claimed shape.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaczmarek, Unknown, and Seiders in view of US Publication 2019/0216191 by Botha (Here forth “Botha”).
Regarding claim 12, Kaczmarek does not expressly disclose wherein there is an inner lining and the first set of fold lines are formed by welding an inner lining of the front surface .
Betha discloses a similar bag/container that teaches wherein the first set of fold lines are formed by welding an inner lining of the front surface (Para 12 of Beta, the concept of creating a fold line by welding two layer together is taught; in the modified Kaczmarek that can the front surface layer and inner lining).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kaczmarek and Betha before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the collapsible container of Kaczmarek to weld a liner attached to the front surface, as taught by Betha, to advantageously provide more insulation to the contents within while securing a fold line at which the surface and liner can bend when necessary.
Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaczmarek, Unknown, and Seiders in view of US Publication 2022/0161986 by Seiders (Here forth “Seiders”).
Regarding claim 20, Kaczmarek does not expressly disclose multiple layers.
Seiders discloses a similar flexible container that teaches wherein each of the front, back, left and right surfaces comprises:
an outer lining material and an inner lining material;
a foam material disposed between the inner and outer lining materials; and
optionally, a foil material disposed between the inner and outer lining materials (Para 65 of Seiders, the outer lining 501, foam 502 and inner lining 500).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kaczmarek and Seiders before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the collapsible container of Kaczmarek to have an outer and inner lining with foam in between, as taught by Seiders, to advantageously provide insulation to the contents within.
Regarding claim 21, Kaczmarek discloses that the fold lines are created via stitching (Para 34 of Kaczmarek) by does not expressly disclose stitching that extends through the outer and inner lining materials.
Seiders discloses a similar collapsible container that teaches wherein the first set of fold lines comprises a stitching that extends from the outer or inner lining material through the foam material and to the other of the outer or inner lining material (Para 70-71 of Seiders).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kaczmarek and Seiders before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the collapsible container of Kaczmarek to have an outer and inner lining with foam stitched together, as taught by Seiders, to advantageously keep the insulation and linings attached together to keep them intact.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JESSICA KAVINI TAMIL whose telephone number is (571)272-6655. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-5:00pm.
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 at 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 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.
/JESSICA KAVINI TAMIL/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/ANDREW T KIRSCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
