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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-15) in the reply filed on August 12, 2026 is acknowledged. Claim 16 is withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
At claim 1, lines 18-20, “moving the shoulder from the deployed position to the retracted position moves the bottom from the retracted position to the deployed position” should read “moving the shoulder from the deployed shoulder position to the retracted shoulder position moves the bottom from the retracted bottom position to the deployed bottom position”;
At claim 2, line 3, “the body are are configured” should read “the body are configured”;
At claim 13, line 2, “the body is comprises” should read “the body comprises”.
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a neck extending the shoulder” at line 5. It is unclear whether the neck is part of the shoulder, or whether the neck extends from the shoulder.
Claim 4 recites “the inner second articulation of the shoulder configured to remain locked in the retracted position” at lines 2-4. It is unclear what this means. Claim 1 already recites that “the shoulder is articulated between at least two stable positions. So it is unclear whether “remain locked” means that a portion of the shoulder never moves to the deployed position, or whether there is some structure holding the inner second articulation in the retracted position. The inner second articulation of the shoulder appears to correspond to “inner articulation 10 of the shoulder 3” (see Specification at pp. 7-8), but the inner articular 10 is shown as changing position between the retracted shoulder position and the deployed shoulder position (see Figs. 3-4).
Claim 15 recites “a stack of annular stiffening members over all or part of a height of the body” in lines 2-3. It is unclear how there could be stiffening members “over all of a height of the body” when the body also includes “at least one deformable zone” as recited in claim 13.
Claims 2-15 are rejected through their dependence on a rejected parent claim (details above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 3-7, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. 4,219,137 to Hutchens (hereinafter, “Hutchens”).
Regarding claim 1, Hutchens discloses a container (see Fig. 1) obtained by blow molding or stretch blow molding from a blank of plastics material (col. 1, ll. 64-67), the container (Fig. 1) comprising: a body (body portion 10, Fig. 1) comprising an upper end (annotated Fig. 1 below) and a lower end (annotated Fig. 1); a shoulder (annotated Fig. 1) extending from the upper end (annotated Fig. 1) of said body (body portion 10); a neck (neck 15, Fig. 1) extending the shoulder (annotated Fig. 1), wherein the shoulder (annotated Fig. 1) is articulated between at least two stable positions (extended position and retracted position, Fig. 1; col. 3, ll. 15-40), wherein a first stable position (extended position, see Fig. 1) is a deployed shoulder position (annotated Fig. 1) in which the shoulder (annotated Fig. 1) projects from the body (body portion 10), and wherein the second stable position (retracted position, see Fig. 1) is a retracted shoulder position (annotated Fig. 1) in which the shoulder extends level with the upper end of the body or is at least partially withdrawn into the body (shoulder is withdrawn into body portion 10, see Fig. 1); and a bottom (bottom 25, Fig. 1) at the lower end (annotated Fig. 1) of said body (body portion 10), wherein the bottom (bottom 25) is articulated with the lower end (annotated Fig. 1) of the body (body portion 10) between at least two additional stable positions (compressed position and expanded position, Fig. 1; col. 3, ll. 15-40), wherein the first additional stable position (compressed position, see Fig. 1) is a deployed bottom position (annotated Fig. 1) in which the bottom (bottom 25) extends level with the lower end (annotated Fig. 1) of the body (body portion 10) or projects at least partially from the body, and wherein the second additional position (expanded position, see Fig. 1) is a retracted bottom position (annotated Fig. 1) in which said bottom (bottom 25) is at least partially withdrawn into the body (body portion 10, see Fig. 1) such that, when the container (Fig. 1) is filled and closed (see Fig. 1), moving the shoulder (annotated Fig. 1) from the deployed position (annotated Fig. 1) to the retracted position (annotated Fig. 1) moves the bottom (bottom 25) from the retracted position (annotated Fig. 1) to the deployed position (annotated Fig. 1; col. 3, ll. 15-40) and vice versa (col. 3, ll. 15-40).
PNG
media_image1.png
843
683
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hutchens Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 3, Hutchens further discloses the shoulder (annotated Fig. 1) comprises a peripheral section (annotated Fig. 1), a central section (annotated Fig. 1) and a sub-neck section (annotated Fig. 1), wherein an outer first articulation (annotated Fig. 1) is defined at a join between the peripheral section (annotated Fig. 1) and the central section (annotated Fig. 1) and an inner second articulation (annotated Fig. 1) is defined at a join between the central section (annotated Fig. 1) and the sub-neck section (annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Hutchens further discloses the inner second articulation (annotated Fig. 1) of the shoulder (annotated Fig. 1) configured to remain locked in the retracted position (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Hutchens further discloses the bottom (bottom 25) comprises a peripheral section (annotated Fig. 1) and a central section (annotated Fig. 1), a first articulation (annotated Fig. 1) being defined at a join (see Fig. 1) between the peripheral section (annotated Fig. 1) and the central section (annotated Fig. 1) and a second articulation (annotated Fig. 1) being defined at a join (see Fig. 1) between the peripheral section (annotated Fig. 1) and the body (body portion 10).
Regarding claim 6, Hutchens further discloses the central section (annotated Fig. 1) of the bottom (bottom 25) comprises a concave central dome (annotated Fig. 1) comprising a substantially spherical cap shape (see Fig. 1; Note – this interpretation of “substantially spherical cap shape” is consistent with Applicant’s specification and Figures – see e.g., central dome 15 Figs. 5-7), wherein a concavity of the central dome (see Fig. 1) faces the outside of the container (see Fig. 1) in the absence of stress (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Hutchens further discloses the central dome (annotated Fig. 1) is rigid or semi-rigid (central dome is semi-rigid, see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Hutchens further discloses the body (body portion 10) has a substantially circular cross-section (see Figs. 2-3; col. 2, ll. 35-39).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutchens.
Regarding claim 2, Hutchens further discloses the articulation of the shoulder (annotated Fig. 1) with the body (body portion 10) and the articulation of the bottom (bottom 25) with the body (annotated Fig. 1) are configured to move the shoulder (annotated Fig. 1) from the deployed shoulder position (annotated Fig. 1) to the retracted shoulder position (annotated Fig. 1; col. 3, ll. 15-40) when the container is filled and closed (see Fig. 1), thereby causing the bottom (bottom 25) to move from the retracted bottom position (annotated Fig. 1) to the deployed bottom position (annotated Fig. 1) while maintaining a pressure level inside the container (col. 2, ll. 6-15; col. 3, ll. 15-40).
Hutchens does not expressly disclose maintaining the pressure level inside the container greater than 100 mbar.
Hutchens teaches that the pressure level inside the container is maintained “in order to avoid creating the vacuum” (col. 2, ll. 6-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container of Hutchens to main the pressure greater than 100 mbar since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233). Here, 100 mbar is greater pressure than a vacuum, but still a very low pressure, and thus the structure of Hutchens would perform the same function as the claimed structure. In the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation (see e.g., Specification at p. 9).
Claims 8, 9, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutchens as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of U.S. Pub. 2020/0307850 to Melrose et al. (hereinafter, “Melrose”).
Regarding claim 8, Hutchens does not expressly disclose the central dome includes one or more stiffening members.
Melrose teaches a similar plastic container comprising a body with a shoulder extending from an upper end, a neck, and a bottom at the lower end (see Figs. 1-3). Melrose teaches that the bottom is articulated between at least two stable positions, including a deployed bottom position, and a retracted bottom position (see Figs. 2-3). Melrose teaches that the bottom comprises a central section with a concave central dome having a substantially spherical cap shape (panel 26, see Figs. 1-3). Melrose teaches that the central dome includes a plurality of stiffening members (reinforcing ribs 24, Fig. 1). Melrose teaches that the central dome includes a plurality of radial grooves extending from a center to a first articulation of the bottom (grooves defined between reinforcing ribs 24, see Fig. 1). Melrose further teaches that the plurality of stiffening members provides reinforcement of the bottom (para. [0053]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container of Hutchens to add a plurality of radially extending stiffening members to the central dome as taught by Melrose for the purpose of reinforcing the bottom, as recognized by Melrose (see para. [0053]). The container of Hutchens as modified by Melrose would have a plurality of radial grooves extending from a center of the central dome to a first articulation of the bottom.
Regarding claim 9, Hutchens as modified by Melrose already includes the central dome includes a plurality of radial grooves (Melrose, grooves defined between reinforcing ribs 24, see Fig. 1) extending from a center of said central dome to the first articulation of the bottom (Melrose, see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Hutchens does not expressly disclose the body comprises at least one deformable zone.
Melrose teaches a similar plastic container comprising a body with a shoulder extending from an upper end, a neck, and a bottom at the lower end (see Figs. 1-3). Melrose teaches that the body comprises at least one deformable zone (panels 1116, Figs. 15-19; paras. [0066]-[0070]). Melrose teaches that the body is stiff outside of the deformable zones (see e.g., para. [0070]). Melrose teaches that the body comprises a stack of annular stiffening members over a height of the body (reinforcing rings 23 and/or ribs 1114, see Fig. 15). Melrose further teaches that the deformable zones serve as grip panels (para. [0066]). Melrose further teaches that the stiffening members provide reinforcement and resist paneling, dents, or other unwanted deformation (para. [0052]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container of Hutchens to include at least one deformable zone and a stack of annular stiffening members of part of a height of the body as taught by Melrose for the purpose of serving as a grip and to provide reinforcement to the body to help resist unwanted deformation, as recognized by Melrose (paras. [0052], [0066]).
Regarding claim 14, Hutchens as modified by Melrose already includes with the exception of the at least one deformable zone, the body is stiffened (Melrose, see e.g., paras. [0052], [0070]).
Regarding claim 15, Hutchens as modified by Melrose already includes the body comprises a stack of annular stiffening members (reinforcing rings 23 and/or ribs 1114, see Fig. 15) over all or part of a height of the body (Melrose, see Figs. 15-19).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutchens as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Pub. 2017/0190097 to Van Dijck et al. (hereinafter, “Van Dijck”).
Regarding claim 10, Hutchens does not expressly disclose the body has a substantially frustoconical shape, of which a large base corresponds to the lower end of the body and the small base corresponds to the upper end of the body.
Van Dijck teaches a similar container having a body, a shoulder, and a bottom (see Fig. 5). Van Dijck teaches that the body may have a substantially frustoconical shape (see Figs. 3, 5; para. [0067]). The substantially frustoconical shape of Van Dijck is oriented such that a large base corresponds to the lower end of the body, and the small base corresponds to the upper end of the body (see Figs. 3, 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container of Hutchens to form the body with a substantially frustoconical shape as taught by Van Dijck because it has been held that changes in shape are an obvious matter of design choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular claimed configuration is significant (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B), citing In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutchens as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Pub. 2020/0189784 to Nakayama (hereinafter, “Nakayama”).
Regarding claim 11, Hutchens does not expressly disclose the body has a square cross-section with quarter- round edges.
Nakayama teaches a similar container having a body, a shoulder, and a bottom (Fig. 1). Nakayama teaches that the body has a square cross-section with quarter-round edges (Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container of Hutchens to form the body with a square cross-section having quarter-round edges as taught by Nakayama because it has been held that changes in shape are an obvious matter of design choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular claimed configuration is significant (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B), citing In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: U.S. Pub. 2015/0298847 to Derrien et al; DE 2102319 to Grieb et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA E. PARKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6014. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:30 pm 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 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.
/LAURA E. PARKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Prosecution Insights