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 .
This action is written in response to the amendment filed 04/20/2026
Claims 1, 3 and 5 have been amended
Claims 1-6 are presented for examination
This action is Final
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.
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(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trayhern (US 2024/0262561) in view of Miller et al. (US 2025/0236447).
Claim 1. Trayhern discloses a beverage stabilizing implement 1 operable to insert into a portable cooler to secure a plurality of beverage containers in an upright position, the stabilizing implement comprising:
a plurality of interconnected cylindrical receptacles 2, each cylindrical receptacle formed from an uninterrupted annular sidewall 7 extending between an open top end and an open bottom end and defining a hollow interior recess configured to receive a beverage container ([0041-0044]; fig. 5); and
a plurality of protuberances 11 jutting inwardly from the annular sidewalls into the hollow interior recess, each protuberance operable to collapse when pressed against by a beverage container [0046];
wherein each protuberance is deformable to resiliently collapse upon contact with an exterior surface of the beverage container to form a frictional
engagement [0046];
wherein the plurality of cylindrical receptacles are arranged such that adjacent receptacles define enclose one or more intermediate recesses extending between the receptacles and configured to permit ice to flow between the receptacles and contact the beverage container (fig. 8, 10).
Trayhern discloses through intermediate recesses but fails to be defined by the cylindrical receptacles. Miller discloses features 210 defined by receptacles 220 ([0052]; fig. 3-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the shape of the intermediate recesses of Trayhern to include the receptacle defined recesses of Trayhern to assist in easy manufacturing of the beverage implement.
It is noted that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the circular recess to eh receptacle-shaped recess, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) MPEP 214.04 IV B
Claim 2. Trayhern discloses the beverage stabilizing implement of claim 1, wherein the protuberances are formed with the sidewall as a single integrated piece ([0046]; fig. 9).
Claim 3. Trayhern discloses the beverage stabilizing implement of claim 1, wherein four or more receptacles 8 join to define an intermediate recess 12 adapted to receive ice, the triangular recess having an open top and open bottom end [0043].
Claim 4. Trayhern discloses the beverage stabilizing implement of claim 1, wherein the protuberances extend into the container recesses [0046].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the size of the protuberance to vary in size in order to assist in accommodating beverages that vary in size.
To modify the size of the protuberances into the claimed varying sizes would entail a mere change in size of the components and yield only predictable results. "[I]f a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond that person's skill." KSR Int 'l v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1396 (2007). A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 5. Trayhern discloses the beverage stabilizing implement of claim 1, wherein the protuberances are spaced at regular intervals (fig. 9).
Claim 6. Trayhern disclose the beverage stabilizing implement of claim 1, wherein the sidewall is between 0.3 inches and 2 inches in height [0019].
It is noted that the average beverage can has a height of 4.83 inches. Trayhern presents an option where the protective device can have a height of half the length of the stored beverage item.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but in view of the amendment the search has been updated, new prior art has been identified and applied, and a new rejection has been made.
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 RAVEN COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-1672. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm EST.
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, ANTHONY STASHICK can be reached at 571-272-4561. 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.
/RAVEN COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
