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 Species 2 (Figures 7-12) in the reply filed on 5/19/2026 is acknowledged. In the reply, Applicant indicated that claims 1-4 and 6-15 correspond to the elected species. Claim 5 is withdrawn from consideration at this time.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Borg et al. (US 2019/0329951).
Regarding claim 1, Borg discloses a container carrier (at 200 in Fig. 7) for unitizing a plurality of containers, the container carrier comprising: a plurality of container rings (See Fig. 8 labeled below) forming an array (as shown in Fig. 7); a first engagement means (See Fig. 8 labeled below) descending from the plurality of container rings and capable of engaging and retaining a can; a second engagement means (See Fig. 8 labeled below) capable of engaging and retaining a bottle, wherein the first engagement means and the second engagement means are generally superimposed upon each other.
PNG
media_image1.png
718
1070
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stewart (US 5,413,395).
Regarding claim 1, Stewart discloses a container carrier (See Figs. 1-2) for unitizing a plurality of containers, the container carrier comprising: a plurality of container rings (See Fig. 2 labeled below) forming an array (as shown in Fig. 1); a first engagement means (at 32) descending from the plurality of container rings (as shown in Fig. 2) and capable of engaging and retaining a can (depending on the size/type of the can); a second engagement means (at 20) capable of engaging and retaining a bottle, wherein the first engagement means and the second engagement means are generally superimposed upon each other (as shown in Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
460
1160
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Stewart discloses the first engagement means comprises a plurality of radial clips (at 32) capable of engaging with a chime of a can (depending on the size/type of the can) and the second engagement means comprises a plurality of radial tabs positioned within each container ring configured to engage with a neck of a bottle (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Stewart discloses the radial clips each include an outwardly extending overhang (bottom portion of 32 – as labeled in Fig. 2 above) capable of engaging with the chime (depending on the size/type of the can).
Regarding claim 4, Stewart discloses the radial tabs extend inwardly and include a concave leading edge (as shown in Fig. 1) capable of engaging with a cap.
Regarding claim 6, Stewart discloses the first engagement means comprises a plurality of clips (at 32/36) extending outwardly from the container rings and the second engagement means comprises a plurality of radial tabs (at 20) extending inwardly from the container rings.
Regarding claim 8, Stewart discloses the plurality of radial clips extend downward from the container rings (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Stewart discloses the radial clips include an outwardly extending overhang (bottom portion of 32 – as labeled in Fig. 2 above).
Regarding claim 10, Stewart discloses the overhang includes at least one ridge (at 36).
Regarding claim 11, Stewart discloses a container carrier (See Figs. 1-2) for unitizing a plurality of containers, the container carrier comprising: a plurality of container rings (See Fig. 2 labeled above), each of the plurality of container rings including a first engagement means (at 32) capable of engaging and retaining a can around a chime (depending on the size/type of the can), and a second engagement means (at 20) capable of engaging and retaining a bottle, wherein the first engagement means and the second engagement means are generally superimposed upon each other (as shown in Fig. 2); an outer perimeter of the each of the plurality of container rings including a plurality of downwardly extending radial clips (at 32) forming the first engagement means, wherein the radial clips in each container ring are capable of engaging and retaining the can (depending on the size/type of the can); and a plurality of radial tabs (at 20) inwardly extending from the outer perimeter forming the second engagement means, wherein the plurality of radial tabs engage and retain the bottle.
Regarding claim 12, Stewart discloses the radial clips each include an outwardly extending overhang (bottom portion of 32 – as labeled in Fig. 2 above) capable of engaging with the chime (depending on the size/type of the can).
Regarding claim 13, Stewart discloses the overhang includes at least one ridge (at 36).
Regarding claim 14, Stewart discloses a container carrier (See Figs. 1-2) for unitizing a plurality of containers, the container carrier comprising: a container ring (See Fig. 2 labeled above); a plurality of radial tabs (at 32) descending outwardly from the container receiving ring, wherein plurality of radial tabs form a first engagement means capable of engaging and retaining a can around a chime of the can (depending on the size/type of the can); and a plurality of radial tabs (at 20) inwardly extending from the container ring and positioned within the container ring, wherein the plurality of radial tabs is a second engagement means capable of engaging and retaining a bottle.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stewart (US 5,413,395) as applied to claims 6 and 14 above, in view of Borg (US 2021/0245940).
Regarding claim 7, Stewart discloses a central ring (at 18) between each container ring, but does not expressly disclose the specific number of container rings. However, Borg teaches it is well known in the art for a container carrier to include any suitable number of container rings such as three or six ([0062]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container carrier of Stewart to have six container rings as taught by Borg in order to conveniently carry six containers. Furthermore, the combination Stewart-Borg would result in central rings (at 18 in Stewart) between each four rings.
Regarding claim 15, Stewart discloses the claimed invention except for the specific material of the container carrier. However, Borg teaches it is well known in the art for a container carrier to be formed from an HDPE material for the purpose of providing the benefit of being recyclable ([0064]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the container carrier of Stewart to be formed from an HDPE material as taught by Borg in order to provide the benefit of being recyclable. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN A REYNOLDS whose telephone number is (571)272-9959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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 Stashick can be reached at (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 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.
/STEVEN A. REYNOLDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights