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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 23 July 2026 has been entered.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: first direction, reverse direction, outer end, J-shaped cross-sectional profile.
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.
Claims 10-11 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.
Claim 10 is led to be indefinite as it is unclear if the flat blocking portion extends from the cover part (C.10: “the flat blocking portion extends linearly from the cover part”) or is part of the cover part (C. 7: “the cover part comprises a flat blocking portion”).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6-8, and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 10-2020-0121091) further in view of Leoncavallo (US 5246145).
Claim 1: Lee discloses a container 100 comprising: a main body 130 (container part) having a filling space 132 (internal reservoir) defined therein and configured to receive some impregnation member therein; a stopper ring 150 (annular retainer) configured to prevent the impregnation member from escaping from the main body 130 (container part); and a cover 110 (cover part) comprises a cover hinge 126 having a flat blocking portion, wherein the cover hinge 126 is rotatably coupled to a main body hinge 149 (support part) of the main body 130 (container part) via a pin passing through both the cover hinge 126 and connected to an body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) of the main body 130 (container part) by the main body hinge 149 (support part) and configured to open and close the main body 130 (container part), wherein the main body 130 (container part) comprises: an inner circumferential surface 134 (inner peripheral wall) and the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) spaced apart from the inner circumferential surface 134 (inner peripheral wall) in an outward direction, with a top-open space defined therebetween, wherein the stopper ring 150 (annular retainer) is coupled to a periphery of the inner circumferential surface 134 (inner peripheral wall), and the cover 110 (cover part) is coupled to the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) and configured to seal the filling space 132 (internal reservoir), wherein at least one sealing groove 144 is defined along a periphery of the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall), wherein the cover 110 (cover portion) comprises a lower circumferential surface 120 having a plurality of sealing protrusions 122 protruding outwardly and discharge grooves 124 positioned between the sealing protrusions 122, wherein the sealing protrusions 122 are inserted into the sealing groove 144 on an inner periphery of the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) to couple the cover 110 (cover portion) to the main body 130 (container part) and a fully annular pressing protrusion 148 formed along an inner peripheral surface of the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) and which presses the entire lower circumferential surface 120, and wherein the stopper ring 150 (annular retainer) has a locking protrusion 158 formed along an inner peripheral surface of the stopper ring 150 (annular retainer) (see fig. 1-3, 9-10, annotated fig. 2, and annotated partial fig. 6 below).
Lee does not disclose the cover part being rotatably coupled to a rotation shaft connected to an outer peripheral wall of the container part and configured to open and close the container part, wherein a plurality of first air grooves are defined spaced apart from one another along an inner peripheral surface of the outer peripheral wall at a plurality of positions above the at least one sealing groove, the plurality of first air grooves configured to allow air inside the container part to be discharged upon closing of the cover part, thereby removing an internal pressure of the container part and enabling stable sealing of the container part, or wherein at least one second air groove is defined along an inner peripheral surface of the annular retainer to allow the air inside the container part to be discharged when the annular retainer is coupled to the container part, thereby removing the internal pressure of the container part.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have made the sealing protrusions 122 be fully annular and to have provided the pressing protrusion 148 with discharge grooves 124 (first air grooves) as it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the locking protrusion 158 to be a series of locking protrusions 158 with discharge grooves 124 (second air grooves) positioned therebetween, as taught by Lee, in order to more easily separate the stopper ring 150 (fixing part).
Leoncavallo teaches a cap 36 having molded hinge pin 80 (rotational shaft) and a dispensing nozzle 34 having a flat blocking part and a hook extending from an underside of the flat blocking portion and configured to be rotatably coupled to the hinge pin 80 (rotational shaft), the flat blocking portion and the hook defining an opening therebetween, the flat blocking portion extending linearly toward an outside area in a first direction, the hook extending from the underside of the flat blocking portion and is curved toward an outer end of the flat blocking portion, the opening defined by the flat blocking portion and the hook is open in a direction parallel to the first direction, the hinge pin 80 (rotational shaft) configured to be inserted through the opening in a reverse direction of the first direction and be received between the flat blocking portion and the hook, and the flat blocking portion and hook define a J-shaped cross-sectional profile (see annotated fig. 9 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have replaced the pin with a hinge pin 80 (rotational shaft) monolithically formed with the main body hinge 149 (support part) and to have modified the cover hinge 126 to be open in a direction parallel to the first direction in which the flat blocking portion extends, forming a hook, and attached to the rotational shaft, in light of Leoncavallo, in order to reduce components and manufacturing steps by allowing the cover 110 (cover part) to attach directly to the main body 130 (container part).
The combination results in the cover 110 (cover part) being rotatably coupled to a hinge pin 80 (rotational shaft) connected to a body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) of the main body 130 (container part) and configured to open and close the main body 130 (container part), wherein a plurality of discharge grooves 124 (first air grooves) are defined spaced apart from one another along an inner peripheral surface of the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) at a plurality of positions above the at least one sealing groove 144, the plurality of discharge grooves 124 (first air grooves) configured to allow air inside the main body 130 (container part) to be discharged upon closing of the cover 110 (cover part), thereby removing an internal pressure of the main body 130 (container part) and enabling stable sealing of the main body 130 (container part), and wherein discharge grooves 124 (second air grooves) are defined along an inner peripheral surface of the stopper ring 150 (annular retainer) to allow the air inside the main body 130 (container part) to be discharged when the stopper ring 150 (annular retainer) is coupled to the main body 130 (container part), thereby removing the internal pressure of the main body 130 (container part).
PNG
media_image1.png
330
348
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
300
209
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
337
335
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 6: The combination discloses wherein the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) is higher than the inner circumferential surface 134 (inner peripheral wall) to prevent an interference between the stopper ring 150 (annular retainer) coupled to the inner circumferential surface 134 (inner peripheral wall) and the cover 110 (cover part) coupled to the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) (see fig. 2).
Claim 7: The combination discloses wherein the main body 130 (container part) comprises a support extending outwardly from the body circumferential surface 140 (outer peripheral wall) of the main body 130 (container part) and configured to connect the hinge pin 80 (rotational shaft) to the main body 130 (container part), and the cover 110 (cover part) comprises a flat blocking portion and a hook extending from an underside of the flat blocking portion and configured to be rotatably coupled to the hinge pin 80 (rotational shaft), the flat blocking portion and the hook defining an opening therebetween (see annotated fig. 9 & 4 above).
Claim 8: The combination discloses wherein the stopper ring 150 (annular retainer) comprises: a peripheral portion formed on outer limits of the inner circumferential surface 134 (inner peripheral wall) of the main body 130 (container part), and an inward flange protruding inward from top of the peripheral portion and configured to prevent some impregnation member from escaping the cover 110 (cover part) (see annotated fig. 10 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
394
406
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 10: The combination discloses wherein the flat blocking portion extends linearly from the cover 110 (cover part) toward an outside area in a first direction, the hook extending from the underside of the flat blocking portion and is curved toward an outer end of the flat blocking portion, the opening defined by the flat blocking portion and the hook is open in a direction parallel to the first direction, and the hinge pin 80 (rotational shaft) is configured to be inserted through the opening in a reverse direction of the first direction and be received between the flat blocking portion and the hook (see annotated fig. 4 and 9 above).
Claim 11: The combination discloses wherein the flat blocking portion and the hook define a J-shaped cross-sectional profile (see annotated fig. 4 and 9 above).
Claim 12: The combination discloses wherein the peripheral portion includes an inner peripheral portion and an outer peripheral portion, and wherein the outer peripheral portion extends linearly and inclines toward the inward flange (see annotated fig. 10 above).
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 10-2020-0121091) and Leoncavallo (US 5246145) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sekine (JP 2005304572).
Claim 2: The combination discloses the claimed invention except wherein the container part is made of a relatively softer material than the cover part, and the cover part is made of a relatively harder material than the container part.
Sekine teaches a cosmetic container 1 having a lid body 6 made of polypropylene and a container body 3 made of high-density polyethylene which is a relatively softer material than polypropylene (see 10th paragraph of the best mode section).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have made the main body 130 (container part) out of high-density polyethylene and the cover 110 (cover portion) out of polypropylene, as taught by Sekine, in order to permit sealing without any particular feeling of resistance and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 3: The combination discloses wherein the cover 110 (cover portion) is made of polypropylene (polypropylene resin) and the main body 130 (container part) out of high-density polyethylene (polyethylene resin).
Response to Arguments
The specification objections in paragraph 3 of office action dated 28 May 2026 are withdrawn in light of the amended disclosure filed 23 July 2023.
The 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejections in paragraphs 4-6 of office action dated 28 May 2026 are withdrawn in light of the amended claims filed 23 July 2023.
Applicant's arguments filed 23 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that the Examiner’s rationale that one would provide grooves to more easily separate the ring is not rationally connected to the claimed structure, that a motivation to ease disassembly does not suggest forming air-venting grooves along the ring’s inner peripheral surface to solve a coupling-pressure issue, and that absent any teaching, suggestion, or rationally-underpinned reason in the references directed to the claimed second air grooves and their assembly-venting function this modification is supported only by importing Applicant’s own disclosure--which constitutes impermissible hindsight, the Examiner replies that “[T]he rationale to modify or combine the prior art does not have to be expressly stated in the prior art; the rationale may be expressly or impliedly contained in the prior art or it can be reasoned from knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, established scientific principles, or legal precedent established by prior case law”. MPEP 2144 I. Further, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In response to applicant’s argument that even where the rationale may be implicit, it must still be rationally connected to the claimed structure and supported by some teaching, knowledge, or recognized problem in the art and here there is none because Lee is directed to ease of separation, not to venting trapped air during coupling, and the two are not interchangeable, the Examiner replies that the reason or motivation to modify the reference may often suggest what the inventor has done, but for a different purpose or to solve a different problem. Further, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
In response to applicant’s argument that the cited references fail to render obvious certain features of claim 1, the Examiner refers to the rejection of claim 1 above in which each feature is met.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the outer peripheral portion extending linearly and then inclining toward the inward flange, the outer peripheral portion including a slanted top edge) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLAN D STEVENS whose telephone number is (571)270-7798. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 12-8 ET.
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.
/ALLAN D STEVENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights