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 .
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 10 and 13-14 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 10, the “the acute angle between the inner rim and the sidewall is approximately between and including 1 and 14 degrees, or is approximately between and including 4 and 6 degrees”. It is unclear what range is being claimed.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites “the inner rim forms an angled surface for sliding contact with a mould core during removal of the shell from a mould”. It is unclear what structure is being claimed in the underlined portion.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites “the inner rim deflects outwardly upon release from a mould core, or the inner rim and outer rim deflect outwardly upon release from the mould core”. It is unclear what structure is being claimed in the underlined portion.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-8, 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) and (a) (2) as being anticipated by US Publication 2007/0000396 by Kieck (Here forth “Kieck”).
Regarding claim 1, Kieck discloses a luggage case comprising:
at least one injection moulded shell (Para 91 of Kieck) including a major face panel (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck) and at least one sidewall together defining an interior storage volume (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck, interior storage volume within case), the sidewall defining at least in part an integrally formed outer rim and an integrally formed inner rim positioned interior of the outer rim (Examiner Annotated Fig 9 of Kieck); and
wherein the inner rim extends along at least a portion of a length of the outer rim (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 and Examiner Annotated Fig 9 of Kieck, the inner rim extends along outer rim), and the inner rim extends at an acute angle away from the sidewall (Examiner Annotated Fig 9 of Kieck).
PNG
media_image1.png
387
727
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck
PNG
media_image2.png
366
392
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Fig 9 of Kieck
Regarding claim 2, Kieck further discloses wherein:
the sidewall extends from along at least a portion of a periphery of the major face panel, the sidewall including at least one corner region and the outer rim defined to at least partially extend along the sidewall and the at least one corner region (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck); and
the inner rim extends along at least a portion of sidewall and along the at least one corner region (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 and Fig 9 of Kieck).
Regarding claim 4, Kieck further discloses wherein:
the inner rim extends continuously along a majority of a length of the sidewall (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck and Para 75 of Kieck, the inner rim will extend continuously at least along a majority of the side wall in order to seal the case).
Regarding claim 6, Kieck further discloses
wherein:
support features extend between the outer rim and the inner rim (Examiner Annotated Fig 9 of Kieck).
Regarding claim 7, Kieck further discloses wherein the outer rim is flush with an exterior surface of at least one sidewall (Examiner annotated Fig 9 of Kieck, outer portion of outer rim is with the side wall is flush).
Regarding claim 8, Kieck further discloses wherein:
at least part of the sidewall extends substantially orthogonally from the major face panel (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck).
Regarding claim 12, Kieck further discloses wherein the at least one shell comprises: a first portion of the sidewall oriented orthogonal relative to the major face panel (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck) and a second portion of the sidewall oriented at an outward angle to the major face panel greater than the first sidewall (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck).
Regarding claim 13, Kieck further discloses wherein:
the inner rim forms an angled surface (Examiner Annotated Fig 9 of Kieck) for sliding contact with a mould core during removal of the shell from a mould (Para 91 of Kieck, the case can be injection moulded and during removable would be capable of sliding off the angled surface portions of the inner rim of the shell).
Regarding claim 14, Kieck further discloses wherein:
the inner rim deflects outwardly upon release from a mould core, or the inner rim and outer rim deflect outwardly upon release from the mould core (Para 92, the shells can be injection moulded and made out of plastic which will be flexible when removed from mould and capable of deflecting outwardly upon release).
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 3 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kieck.
Regarding claim 3, Kieck does not expressly disclose wherein:
the inner rim extends around approximately 50-90 percent of the length of the outer rim.
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 inner rim do be approximately 50-90 percent of the length of the outer rim. Such a modification involves only a difference in recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device. Such modification would involve no change in function (see MPEP 2144.04). Further Applicant has not disclosed criticality for the claimed dimensions.
Regarding claim 9, Kieck further disclose wherein:
the sidewall includes a top panel and an opposing bottom panel (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck); and
the bottom panel extends from the major face panel at an angle between and including approximately 90 to 98 degrees (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Kieck, the angle can be seen to be 90 degrees) .
Regarding claim 10, Kieck does not expressly disclose wherein the acute angle between the inner rim and the sidewall is approximately between and including 1 and 14 degrees, or is approximately between and including 4 and 6 degrees.
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 acute angle between the inner rim and the sidewall is approximately between and including 1 and 14 degree. The presence of conception involving only a change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05II).
Regarding claim 11, Kieck does not expressly disclose further discloses wherein the inner rim is at an angle of approximately between and including 80 and 94 degrees relative to the major face panel.
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 angle between the inner rim to be at an angle of approximately between and including 80 and 94 degrees relative to the major face panel. The presence of conception involving only a change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05II).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kieck in view of Foreign Publication CN206482178 by Hu (Here forth “Hu”).
Regarding claim 5, Kieck does not expressly disclose wherein the inner rim extends around an entirety of the length of the outer rim .
Hu discloses a similar luggage that teaches wherein the inner rim extends around the entirety of the length of the outer rim (Page 17 para 8 of Hu, the cover is provided continuously or intermittently with a second hollow structure/inner rim).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kieck and Hu before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the case of Kieck to an inner rim that extends around the entirety of the length of the outer rim, as taught by Hu, to advantageously add a supporting region to prevent deformation of portions of the case (Page 17, Para 18 of Hu).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kieck, as applied in claim 1, in view of US Publication US Publication 2017/0143090 by Naiva (Here forth “Naiva”).
Regarding claim 15, Kieck does not expressly disclose wheels or a tow handle.
Naiva further discloses further comprising:
at least one wheel mounted on a corner region of a bottom panel of the injection moulded shell (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Naiva); and
a tow handle mounted on a rear main face panel of the luggage shell (Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Naiva).
PNG
media_image3.png
540
451
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Fig 1 of Naiva
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kieck and Naiva before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the case of Kieck to include a tow handle and wheels, as taught by Naiva, to advantageously transport the case without having to carry it.
Conclusion
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 2142. 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
/NATHAN J JENNESS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3733 24 August 2026
Prosecution Insights