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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/3/25 has been considered by the examiner. It is noted the Non-Patent Literature Document cited thereon has been lined through since this citation did not include the correct date, i.e., the citation includes a date of 6 June 2025, however, the corresponding document filed with the IDS has a date of 9 June 2025.
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
Phrases that can be implied, such as “are disclosed” (see line 1) should not be present therein.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 0017, on lines 6-7, it appears “the first nozzle portion and second nozzle portion” should be “the first nozzle mounting portion and second nozzle mounting portion”. See the rejection of claim 11 under 35 USC 112 below.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-10 and 13-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regard to claims 3-10, on lines 1-2, “any of claims 1” should be “claim 1”.
In regard to claim 5, it is unclear as to what disclosed structure the “body” is intended to define, i.e., the first, second and third portions of the tamper evident assembly are disposed on the lid (which is defined in claim 1) and do not appear to be disposed on some other “body”.
In regard to claims 13-20, on lines 1-2, “any of claims 11” should be “claim 11”. 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.
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 11-20 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.
In regard to claim 11, an antecedent basis for “the first nozzle portion and second nozzle portion” has not been defined. It appears this should read “the first nozzle mounting portion and second nozzle mounting portion” (see claim 11, lines 3- 5 and 8).
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lay (U.S. Patent 5,875,907).
In regard to claim 1, the Lay reference discloses a packaging system comprising:
a lid 14 and a base portion 12;
a tamper evident assembly comprising first, second, and third portions;
the first portion comprising a plurality of breakable structures (the breakable structures being located between the perforations at junction 60, see column 6, lines 52-58) connected to the lid portion;
the second portion 58 comprising a projecting bearing surface (which bears against wall 72, see Figure 8); and
the third portion comprising a hook portion 62, 64 (see column 6, lines 6-11);
wherein the tamper evident assembly includes a first state comprising the plurality of breakable structures being unbroken (see Figure 6) and a second state comprising the plurality of breakables structures being broken (see Figure 8).
In regard to claim 2, the hook portion comprises a cam surface (at 62b, 64b, see Figure 4);
In regard to claim 3, the base portion 14 comprises an opening 66, 68, for receiving the hook portion.
In regard to claim 4, the tamper evident assembly is disposed in a recessed space of the lid portion (at least in part, viewing Figure 8, portion 60a of the tamper evident assembly is disposed in a recessed portion of the lid 14.
In regard to claim 5, as best understood, inasmuch as the Applicant’s first, second and third portions are “disposed on a body of the tamper evident assembly”, the first, second and third portion in the Lee device are “disposed on a body of the tamper evident assembly”.
In regard to claim 6, the tamper evident assembly is retained by the base portion after the plurality of breakable structures are broken (see Figure 8).
In regard to claim 7, a nozzle portion 30 is connected to the base portion 12 (see Figure 1).
In regard to claim 8, the second portion 58 is disposed between the first and third portions.
In regard to claim 9, the projecting bearing surface bears against a support surface 72 of the base portion (see Figures 4 and 6).
In regard to claim 10, the tamper evident assembly comprises an arcuate body.
Claims 11, 13, 15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Quinn (US 2014/0008381, as cited by the Applicant).
In regard to claim 11, the Quinn reference discloses a packaging system comprising a base portion 314 and a nozzle portion on top of the base portion (there is nozzle portion on container 300; see Figures 12, 18 and the figure below);
the base portion comprising an opening for receiving the nozzle portion and first nozzle and second mounting portions;
the first nozzle mounting portion comprising a first wall that is received within a recess of the nozzle portion to orient the nozzle portion for insertion into the base portion; and
the second nozzle mounting nozzle portion comprising a second wall that is received within a neck portion of the nozzle portion;
wherein the first nozzle (mounting) portion and second nozzle (mounting) portion comprises a snap fit connection (see paragraph 0027 wherein it is disclosed the base may be snap-fitted to the container) that maintains the base portion and nozzle portion connected together.
In regard to claim 13, the recess of the nozzle portion comprises an arcuate shape.
In regard to claim 15, the nozzle portion comprises a dispensing portion (defined partially by the protrusion of the nozzle portion positioned above the second nozzle mounting portion) and wherein the neck portion is at least partially recessed from the dispensing portion.
In regard to claim 18, the nozzle comprises a tapered surface that bears against the second nozzle mounting portion during insertion.
In regard to claim 19, the first wall limits the insertion distance of the nozzle portion into the base portion.
In regard to claim 20, the first wall limits rotation of the nozzle portion with respect to the base portion during insertion, i.e., viewing Figure 18, the first wall will limit the rotation of the container and nozzle with respect the base portion about an axis perpendicular to the plane of the paper.
PNG
media_image1.png
558
438
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 12, 14, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quinn.
In regard to claim 12, although the Quinn reference does not disclose the first wall comprises an arcuate shape, it is the examiner’s position it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made the first wall (as well as the base, spout, etc.) can be designed to any suitable profiled, including a rounded profile (see, for example base 24 in Figure 1), especially since the Applicant has not indicated the particular profile of the device is critical to the overall operation thereof (see paragraph 0052, lines 10-12 wherein the Applicant discloses the device may have any shape/configuration) and the Quinn reference does not limit the shape/configuration of the device. Such a rounded profile would render the first wall arcuate in shape.
In regard to claim 14, Figure 18 shows a locking bead between the nozzle portion and the second wall. Although the locking bead is shown to connected to the second wall, and the nozzle, as claimed, it is the examiner’s position it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made the locking bead can be positioned on either the nozzle portion or second wall (with the groove receiving the locking portion being positioned on the other of the nozzle portion or second wall) since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
In regard to claims 16 and 17, as discussed above, the base portion is snap-fit onto the nozzle portion and as such, viewing Figure 18, there must be some deformation of the nozzle portion or/and the base portion (i.e., the opening/second nozzle mounting portion). Although the Quinn reference does not disclose which of nozzle portion or base portion is deformed (i.e., changes in size/orientation) is the examiner’s position it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made the Quinn device can be designed such that either the base portion or the nozzle portion (or both) can be designed to deform (i.e., change in shape or orientation) without effecting the overall operation of the device, especially since the Applicant has not indicated the specific element that is deformed during the snap-fit of the base portion onto the nozzle portion is critical to the overall operation of the device and the Quinn reference in no way limits which of the base portion or nozzle portion is deformed during the snap-fir of the base portion onto the nozzle portion.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The Newell et al. reference is cited as being directed to the state of the art as a teaching of another packaging system having a lid and base portion with a frangible hook mounted to the lid portion which remains with the base portion when the lid is opened for the first time. The Koenigseder et al. and Robinson references are cited as being directed to the state of the art as teachings of a packaging system comprising a base portion and nozzle portion snap-fit within the base portion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J WALCZAK whose telephone number is (571)272-4895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30-4:00.
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, David Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
DJW
10/2/26
/DAVID J WALCZAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
