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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to Applicant’s filing on 28 March 2025.
Claims 1 – 8 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 28 March 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected for the following reasons:
37 CFR 1.84(p)(1) describes reference characters in drawings must be plain and legible. In the instant drawings, the reference characters are handwritten and in some cases difficult to discern what numeral reference character represents. For better readability and comprehension, the reference characters should be typed such that every number and letter is sufficiently dense, dark, uniformly thick, and well-defined.
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
Claims 2 – 3 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2, the limitation, “comprise, indifferently”, should read, “comprise”.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation, “the three transversal score lines (C1, C2, C3)”, should read, “the three transversal score lines”.
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 – 8 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.
Regarding claim 1, line 47, the limitation, “them”, is indefinite because the term “them” is a pronoun that refers to an element previously recited and it is ambiguous as written in the claim as to the antecedent basis of the pronoun or, in other words, what element the term “them” refers. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation, “them”, to mean “the first sheet half section and the second sheet half section”. Please note, since claims 2 – 8 depend upon claim 1, claims 2 – 8 are likewise rejected under 35 USC §112(b) for indefiniteness.
Regarding claim 1, line 61, the limitation, “the respective base face”, is indefinite because the limitation lacks antecedent basis. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the examiner interprets the limitation, “the respective base face”, to mean “a respective base face”. Please note, since claims 2 – 8 depend upon claim 1, claims 2 – 8 are likewise rejected under 35 USC §112(b) for indefiniteness.
Regarding claim 4, line 4, the limitation, “them”, is indefinite because the term “them” is a pronoun that refers to an element previously recited and it is ambiguous as written in the claim as to the antecedent basis of the pronoun or, in other words, what element the term “them” refers. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation, “them”, to mean “the first sheet half section and the second sheet half section”.
Regarding claim 5, line 4, the limitation, “them”, is indefinite because the term “them” is a pronoun that refers to an element previously recited and it is ambiguous as written in the claim as to the antecedent basis of the pronoun or, in other words, what element the term “them” refers. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation, “them”, to mean “the first sheet half section and the second sheet half section”.
Regarding claim 6, lines 7 – 11, the limitation, “wherein the closing tab, after the fourth sector of the second sheet section has been rotated and arranged facing the fourth lateral face of the article, to form a lateral wall of the box, can be rotated and folded about the fourth transversal score line”, is indefinite because the term, “can be”, indicates possibility wherein the limitation may or may not occur. In other words, limitation using the terms, “can be”, is not positively recited. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation to mean “wherein the closing tab, after the fourth sector of the second sheet section has been rotated and arranged facing the fourth lateral face of the article, to form a lateral wall of the box, is rotated and folded about the fourth transversal score line”. Please note, since claims 7 – 8 depend upon claim 6, claims 7 – 8 are likewise rejected under 35 USC §112(b) for indefiniteness.
Regarding claim 7, line 4, the limitation, “them”, is indefinite because the term “them” is a pronoun that refers to an element previously recited and it is ambiguous as written in the claim as to the antecedent basis of the pronoun or, in other words, what element the term “them” refers. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation, “them”, to mean “the first sheet half section and the second sheet half section”. Please note, since claim 8 depends upon claim 7, claim 8 is likewise rejected under 35 USC §112(b) for indefiniteness.
Regarding claim 7, line 59, the limitation, “them”, is indefinite because the term “them” is a pronoun that refers to an element previously recited and it is ambiguous as written in the claim as to the antecedent basis of the pronoun or, in other words, what element the term “them” refers. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation, “them”, to mean “the first reinforcing tab and the third reinforcing tab”. Please note, since claim 8 depends upon claim 7, claim 8 is likewise rejected under 35 USC §112(b) for indefiniteness.
Regarding claim 7, line 65, the limitation, “them”, is indefinite because the term “them” is a pronoun that refers to an element previously recited and it is ambiguous as written in the claim as to the antecedent basis of the pronoun or, in other words, what element the term “them” refers. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation, “them”, to mean “the second reinforcing tab and the fourth reinforcing tab”. Please note, since claim 8 depends upon claim 7, claim 8 is likewise rejected under 35 USC §112(b) for indefiniteness.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 8 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID G SHUTTY whose telephone number is 571-272-3626. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5:30 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached on 571-272-4524. 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.
/DAVID G SHUTTY/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
13 December 2025