DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II claims 14-19 in the reply filed on 4-17-2026 is acknowledged. The restriction is made final.
Claim Objections
Claims 15 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 15, line 3 and claim 16, line 2 “boarder” should be --border--. Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 4-8-2025 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because the NPL references 2,3 and 4 are undated. It has been placed in the application file, but the NPL reference information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
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(s) 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarnoff (10,086,981) in view of Sternau (3,439,587). Sarnoff discloses a method of manufacturing a disposable aluminum lid (100) comprising, placing a sheet of aluminum (220) between a pair of die shoes (205,210) and stamping the pair of die shoes together (col. 4, lines 66-67) to form the aluminum lid (100). The aluminum lid (100) is structured to include a base (Fig. 18) with a top section (102) and a bottom section (opposite side of 102; Fig. 18), the base terminating around a periphery at an edge (104) and a skirt (108) downwardly extending from the edge (104) of the base. Sarnoff does not disclose forming a hole (window) in the base and securing a transparent film on the bottom side of the base to cover the window. Sternau teaches forming a lid (closure, Fig. 14; col. 3, lines 42-49 and col. 5, lines 8-12) made of aluminum (col. 4, lines 58-59 and col. 12, lines 65-67). The lid is formed by dies (15,17; col. 7, lines 49-51) and comprises a base (30) having a top section (where 30 is pointing; Fig. 14) and a bottom section (opposite side of top section; Fig. 14). The base (30) includes a peripheral flange (skirt) extending downwardly (Fig. 14) from an edge of the base (30). The base (30) has a hole (window, 31) cut out of a center of the base and a transparent film (5) covers the window to allow viewing of the product in the container to which the lid is secured. Sternau teaches (col. 5, line 12 and col. 7, lines 14-21) that the transparent film (5) is an inner cover on the bottom section of the lid base.
Regarding claim 15, Sternau teaches (col. 5, lines 46-50) that an adhesive (sealant, 14) is applied to the lid to secure the film to the lid around a border (peripherally of the rim; col. 5, lines 61-63) of the lid.
Regarding claim 16, Sternau teaches applying a heat seal to the transparent film and lid (col. 5, lines 63-70).
Regarding claim 17, Sternau teaches a circular window (31; Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 18, Sarnoff discloses a rectangular lid (100) and Sternau teaches circular lids (Fig. 14) and rectangular lids (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 19, Sternau teaches mylar film (col. 11, lines 42-43) which is a polyester film.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD THOMAS TOLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
/EDWARD T TOLAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights