Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/185,782

BOTTLE WITH HANDLE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Apr 22, 2025
Priority
Apr 30, 2024 — JP 2024-073579
Examiner
RODRIGUEZ MOLINA, MARCOS JAVIER
Art Unit
3735
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Yoshino Kogyosho Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allowance Rate
93 granted / 171 resolved
-15.6% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
211
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
51.8%
+11.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
§112
24.0%
-16.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 171 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . This Office Action is in response to the Non-Final Rejection filed on May 21, 2026 wherein claim(s) 1-2 were amended, claim(s) 4-5 are new. Examiner notes amendments in claims are directed to overcome rejections under 35 USC § 103. Therefore, claim(s) 1-5 are pending and will be examined. Specification The disclosure is objected to because the following informalities: CLAIMS Claim(s) 1 recites --A bottle with a handle, wherein a handle-- [line(s) 1-2] and is objected because --a handle-- appears to refers to --the handle-- in the preamble. Claim(s) 5 recites --the rib is provided in a center portion of the holding portion-- [line(s) 5] and is objected because --a center portion-- appears to refer to --the center portion-- of claim(s) 4. 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) 1-2, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota et al. (U. S. Patent US5819966A) hereinafter OTA, in view of Grob et al. (U. S. Patent US6444158B1) hereinafter GROB, in further view of Kim et al. (South Korea Patent Application Publication KR20140064177A) hereinafter KIM. Regarding claim 1, OTA teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 4 below) a bottle 1 with a handle 11, wherein a handle 11 is attached to a body portion 2 of a bottle 1 having a center axis line (Y) extending in an upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y), the handle 11 includes a fixed portion 15, 16, 19 fixed to the body portion 2, a holding portion 12 provided away to a rear O3-01 in a radial direction (+X) from the fixed portion 15, 16, 19 and extending in the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y), an upper joint portion 19 joining respective upper end portions O3-02 of the fixed portion 15, 16, 19 and the holding portion 12 to each other, and a lower joint portion 19 joining respective lower end portions O3-03 of the fixed portion 15, 16, 19 and the holding portion 12 to each other. the holding portion 12 is formed in a plate shape, front and rear surfaces of the holding portion 12 being directed in a forward-rearward direction, and the holding portion 12 is curved so as to exhibit a curved shape projecting forward in a vertical cross-sectional view in the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y) and exhibit a curved shape projecting forward in a cross-sectional view orthogonal to the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y). OTA fails to teach the holding portion 12 is formed in a plate shape. OTA fails to teach front and rear surfaces of the holding portion 12 being directed in a forward-rearward direction (+X, -X). OTA fails to teach holding portion 12 is curved so as to exhibit a curved shape projecting forward (-X) in a vertical cross-sectional view in the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y) and exhibit a curved shape projecting forward (-X) in a cross-sectional view orthogonal to the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y). OTA fails to teach distance O1-01 from the center axis line (Y) to a part of the holding portion 12 between the upper end portion O3-02 of the holding portion 12 and the lower end portions O3-03 of the holding portion 12 is less than a distance O1-01 from the center axis line (Y) to the upper end portion O3-02 of the holding portion 12, and less than a distance O1-01 from the center axis line (Y) to the lower end portions O3-03 of the holding portion 12. However, GROB teaches (see FIG. 2 - FIG. 3, FIG. 6, FIG. 8, FIG. 10 - FIG. 11, FIG. 14 - FIG. 15 below) a bottle G6-01 with a handle 18 to meet design requirements. GROB further teaches holding portion 23 is formed in a plate shape 43, front and rear surfaces (FIG. 10) of the holding portion 23 being directed in a forward-rearward direction (+X, -X) to meet design requirements. GROB further teaches holding portion 23 is curved so as to exhibit (FIG. 10) a curved shape projecting forward (-X) in a vertical cross-sectional view in the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y) and exhibit (FIG. 10) a curved shape projecting forward (-X) in a cross-sectional view orthogonal to the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y) to meet design requirements. Furthermore, KIM teaches (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 2, FIG. 4 below) container 100, wherein distance K4-01 from the mounting member 10 to a part of the handling member 20 between the upper end portion K4-02 of the handling member 20 and the lower end portions K4-03 of the handling member 20 is less than a distance K4-01 from the mounting member 10 to the upper end portion K4-02 of the handling member 20, and less than a distance K4-01 from the mounting member 10 to the lower end portions K4-03 of the handling member 20 to meet design requirements. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified holding portion 12 in the bottle 1 with a handle 11 of OTA with holding portion 23 as taught in the bottle G6-01 with a handle 18 of GROB to meet design requirements. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified holding portion 12 in the bottle 1 with a handle 11 of OTA and GROB with handling member 20 as taught in the container 100 of KIM to meet design requirements. PNG media_image1.png 794 429 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 742 514 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 817 425 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 776 323 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 561 330 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 236 368 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 880 400 media_image7.png Greyscale PNG media_image8.png 608 395 media_image8.png Greyscale PNG media_image9.png 756 484 media_image9.png Greyscale PNG media_image10.png 568 584 media_image10.png Greyscale PNG media_image11.png 637 350 media_image11.png Greyscale PNG media_image12.png 661 238 media_image12.png Greyscale PNG media_image13.png 763 580 media_image13.png Greyscale PNG media_image14.png 577 765 media_image14.png Greyscale PNG media_image15.png 474 869 media_image15.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, OTA, GROB, and KIM (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. The combination of OTA (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 4 above), GROB (see FIG. 2 - FIG. 3, FIG. 6, FIG. 8, FIG. 10 - FIG. 11, FIG. 14 - FIG. 15 above), and KIM (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 2, FIG. 4 above) further teaches bottle 1 with a handle 11, wherein a side plate portion 43, which protrudes rearward (+X) and extends in the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y) and front and rear surfaces (GROB, FIG. 10) of which are directed in a left-right direction (GROB, FIG. 10), is provided in each of both end portions of the holding portion 23 in the left-right direction (GROB, FIG. 10), and in the side plate portion 43, at least a rear portion (GROB, FIG. 10) on an outer surface directed outward in the left-right direction (GROB, FIG. 10) exhibits a curved shape protruding outward (+X) in the left-right direction (GROB, FIG. 10) in a cross-sectional view orthogonal to the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y). Regarding claim 4, OTA, GROB, and KIM (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. The combination of OTA (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 4 above), GROB (see FIG. 2 - FIG. 3, FIG. 6, FIG. 8, FIG. 10 - FIG. 11, FIG. 14 - FIG. 15 above), and KIM (see FIG. 1 - FIG. 2, FIG. 4 above) further teaches bottle 1 with a handle 11, wherein a center portion of the holding portion 12, the center portion being centered in each of the upward-downward direction (+Y, -Y) and a left-right direction in the holding portion 12, is positioned in a frontmost position of the holding portion 12. Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 3, 5 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response To Arguments Applicant's arguments / amendments regarding rejections under 35 USC § 103 of claim(s) 1-3 in the reply filed May 21, 2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejections under 35 USC § 103 does not rely on exactly all references / arguments applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the Applicant’s arguments. With respect to the art rejections, in accordance with MPEP 2111.01, during examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 70 USPQ2D 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Tanaka et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20230166886A1): teaches a “bottle” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Lizuka et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20030006210A1): teaches a “device” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Usami et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20180170616A1): teaches a “handle and container” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Contact Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS JAVIER RODRIGUEZ MOLINA whose telephone number is (571) 272-8947. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM. 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, ANTHONY D. STASHICK can be reached on (571) 272-4561. 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 ttps://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. /M.J.R.M./ /Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 22, 2025
Application Filed
May 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Aug 21, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 07, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12767395
CONTAINER ASSEMBLY AND CONTAINER LID
1y 2m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12763297
Storage Cassette for Replaceable Parts for Plasma Processing Apparatus
3y 11m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12741778
Cardboard Tray
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12715238
Paint Container Liner
4y 4m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12703563
CONTAINER SYSTEM FOR PHOSPHOROUS PENTASULFIDE
3y 8m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+25.4%)
2y 4m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 171 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month