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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, (1) the combination of the spoke folds in the body being folded towards a center of the container (claim 8) and the spoke folds in the crown being folded to an outside away from the center of the container, (2) the combination of the angled spoke folds in the body being folded to an outside away from a center of the container (claim 10) and the angled spoke folds in the crown being folded towards a center of the container (claim 11), and (3) the opening on the top of the container being positioned below a plane defined by the body fold (claim 15) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “fold” should be --folds--.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “one of the face sections” should be --one of the one or more face sections--, and
In line 2, “one of the fold sections” should be --one of the one or more fold sections--.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “one of the face sections” should be --one of the one or more face sections--, and
In line 2, “one of the fold sections” should be --one of the one or more fold sections--.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “the one of the face sections” should be --the one of the one or more face sections--, and
In line 2, “the face section” should be --the one of the one or more face sections--.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “the one of the fold sections” should be --the one of the one or more fold sections--, and
In line 2, “the fold section” should be --the one of the one or more fold sections--.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “the spoke fold” should be --the one or more spoke folds--, and
In line 2, “the center” should be --a center--.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “the spoke fold” should be --the one or more spoke folds--, and
In line 2, “the outside” should be --an outside--.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “where the container” should be --wherein when the container--,
In line 1, “the angled spoke fold” should be --the one or more angled spoke folds--,
In line 2, “the outside” should be --an outside--, and
In line 2, “the center” should be --a center--.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “where the container” should be --wherein when the container--, and
In line 1, “the angled spoke fold” should be --the one or more angled spoke folds--.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “where the container” should be --wherein when the container--, and
In line 2, “the top” should be --a top--.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “where the container” should be --wherein when the container--.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “where the container” should be --wherein when the container--.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “where the container” should be --wherein when the container--.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “the angle” should be --an angle--.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “the angle” should be --an angle--.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “the face sections and the fold sections” should be --the one or more face sections and the one or more fold sections--, and
In line 2, “the distal ends of the fold sections and the face sections” should be --distal ends of the one or more face sections and the one or more fold sections--.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “the face sections and the fold sections” should be --the one or more face sections and the one or more fold sections--, and
In line 2, “the distal ends of the face sections and the fold sections” should be --distal ends of the one or more fold sections and the one or more face sections--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 11 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 11 recites the limitation “wherein when the container is folded the angled spoke fold in the body is folded towards the center of the container”. However, claim 10, from which claim 11 depends, requires “when the container is folded, the angled spoke in the body is folded to the outside away from the center of the container”. Accordingly, it is not clear how the angled spoke fold in the body can be folded both to the outside away from the center of the container and towards the center of the container.
For the purpose of examination, the angled spoke fold in the crown will be considered to be folded towards the center of the container.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7, 12, 13 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujihara et al. (US 4,795,082 A, hereinafter Fujihara).
Regarding claim 1, Fujihara teaches a container comprising:
a base (2) comprising:
a base fold (4);
a body circumferentially connected to the base at the base fold comprising:
a body fold (8);
one or more face sections (areas between 4, 6, 8, 10);
one or more fold sections (areas between 6, 8, 10);
a crown circumferentially connected to the body at the body fold comprising:
one or more face sections (outer areas between 141/112, 142/113, 143/114, 144/115, 145/116, 146/117, 147/118, 148/111); and
one or more fold sections (outer areas between 111/141, 112/142, 113/143, 114/144, 115/145, 116/146, 117/147, 118/148) (column 2 line 44-column 3 line 40 and FIG. 1-4).
Regarding claim 2, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 1 above, wherein the container further comprises one or more spoke folds (6) (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 2 above, wherein the container further comprises one or more angled spoke folds (10/12) (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 3 above, wherein one of the one or more face sections in the body is positioned next to one of the one or more fold sections in the body (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 4 above, wherein one of the one or more face sections in the crown is positioned next to one of the one or more fold sections in the crown (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 5 above, wherein the one of the one or more face sections in the body is positioned next to the one of the one or more face sections in the crown (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 6 above, wherein the one of the one or more fold sections in the body is positioned next to the one of the one or more fold sections in the crown (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 6 above, wherein when the container is folded the crown includes an opening formed on a top of the container (FIG. 3, when container is partially folded the crown includes an opening).
Regarding claim 13, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 12 above, wherein when the container is folded, the opening formed on top of the container is positioned above a place defined by the body fold (FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 17, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 12 above, wherein the body is folded in an upward direction in comparison to the base such that an angle between the body and a place defined by the base is substantially ninety degrees (FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 18, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 12 above, wherein the one or more face sections and the one or more fold sections of the body are folded such that distal ends of the one or more fold sections and the one or more face sections are angled in a counterclockwise direction (FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 19, Fujihara teaches the container of claim 18 above, wherein the one or more face sections and the one or more fold sections of the crown are folded such that distal ends of the one or more fold sections and the one or more face sections are angled in a clockwise direction (FIG. 3).
Claims 1-12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (US 5,397,051 A, hereinafter Liu).
Regarding claim 1, Liu teaches a container comprising:
a base (30) comprising:
a base fold (a);
a body circumferentially connected to the base at the base fold comprising:
a body fold (b);
one or more face sections (41);
one or more fold sections (51);
a crown circumferentially connected to the body at the body fold comprising:
one or more face sections (42); and
one or more fold sections (52/52’) (column 3 line 28-column 5 line 18 and FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 2, Liu teaches the container of claim 1 above, wherein the container further comprises one or more spoke folds (folds d/e/f between 51&51, 52’&52’ and 53’&53’) (FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 3, Liu teaches the container of claim 2 above, wherein the container further comprises one or more angled spoke folds (folds d/e/f between 51&41, 52&42, 53&43) (FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 4, Liu teaches the container of claim 3 above, wherein one of the one or more face sections in the body is positioned next to one of the one or more fold sections in the body (FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 5, Liu teaches the container of claim 4 above, wherein one of the one or more face sections in the crown is positioned next to one of the one or more fold sections in the crown (FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 6, Liu teaches the container of claim 5 above, wherein the one of the one or more face sections in the body is positioned next to the one of the one or more face sections in the crown (FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 7, Liu teaches the container of claim 6 above, wherein the one of the one or more fold sections in the body is positioned next to the one of the one or more fold sections in the crown (FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 8, Liu teaches the container of claim 7 above, wherein when the container is folded, the one or more spoke folds in the body are folded towards a center of the container (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Liu teaches the container of claim 8 above, wherein when the container is folded, the one or more spoke folds in the crown are folded to an outside away from the center of the container (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Liu teaches the container of claim 6 above, wherein when the container is folded, the one or more angled spoke folds in the body are folded to an outside away from a center of the container (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Liu teaches the container of claim 10 above, wherein when the container is folded, the one or more angled spoke folds in the crown are folded towards the center of the container (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Liu teaches the container of claim 6 above, wherein when the container is folded, the crown includes an opening (54) formed on a top of the container (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Liu teaches the container of claim 12 above, wherein when the container is folded, the opening (54) formed on the top of the container is positioned in line with a plane defined by the body fold (FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 15, Liu teaches the container of claim 12 above, wherein when the container is folded, the opening (54) formed on the top of the container is positioned below a plane defined by the body fold (FIG. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 16, Liu teaches the container of claim 12 above, wherein the body is folded in an upward direction in comparison to the base such that an angle between the body and a plane defined by the base is greater than ninety degrees (FIG. 5).
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujihara and Liu, as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 20, Fujihara and Liu teach the container of claim 1 above but fails to teach the base fold being circular. However, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it to be an obvious matter of design choice to change the shape of the base and the base fold to be circular, as claimed, as changing the shape of the base and the base fold by merely rounding the edges and corners of the base is insufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art absent persuasive evidence that the particular shape of the base and base fold is significant. One having ordinary skill in the art would also expect the change of shape to yield obvious and predictable results as changing the shape of the base merely requires rounding the edges and the corners of the bases of Fujihara and Liu and does not require any additional face sections, fold sections or folds. Accordingly, such a modification is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Hanus (US 4,930,680 A), Hanus (US 4,850,528 A), Miyazaki US D272,130 S) and Lowry (US 3,181,764 A).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NINA KAY ATTEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3972. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-4PM 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, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/NINA K ATTEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3734
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
