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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8, 13, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 13, and 19 all state roughly “the band anchor being movable between a molded, unlocking position in which the band anchor extends at a downwardly-sloped angle away from the cover and toward a central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal, to an attached, locking position in which the band anchor extends at an upwardly-sloped angle toward the cover and the central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal end”. The Examiner believes the claims are intended to state something along the lines of “the band anchor being movable between a molded, unlocking position in which the band anchor extends at a downwardly-sloped angle away from the cover and toward a central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the [[distal, to]] distal end, and an attached, locking position in which the band anchor extends at an upwardly-sloped angle toward the cover and the central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal end”. Further clarification and correction are required.
Claim 8 currently references “an band anchor abutting the stacking ring.” The Examiner believes the claim is intended to reference “[[an]] a band anchor abutting the stacking ring.”
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 7 and 17 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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "each frangible connection" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of further consideration, the claim is being interpreted as stating “each frangible [[connection]] segment”. Further clarification/correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "each frangible connection" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of further consideration, the claim is being interpreted as stating “each frangible [[connection]] segment”. Further clarification/correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 1-4, 6, 10-15, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gregory (US 6382443).
Regarding Claim 1
Gregory teaches a package (below – Fig. 1-3 and 5) comprising: a container (22) including a floor and a sidewall coupled to the floor and extending in an upward direction away from the floor to at least partially define a product storage region, the sidewall including a sidewall panel having a first end coupled to a periphery of the floor and a second end spaced apart from the first end, a closure mount (28) coupled to an exterior surface of the sidewall panel at a position closer to the second end than the first end, and a band mount (43) coupled to the exterior surface of the sidewall panel and located below the closure mount at a position closer to the second end than the first end, and a closure (24) configured to mount selectively to the container at the second end of the sidewall panel, the closure including a cover (30) extending across the second end of the container, a skirt (34) coupled to a periphery of the cover and extending in a downward direction away from the cover to engage with the closure mount (28) of the container, and a tamper-evident band coupled to a lower end of the skirt, wherein the tamper-evident band includes a band ring (38) extending annularly around the sidewall panel, a frangible connector (41) interconnecting the lower end of the skirt and an upper end of the band ring and configured to separate the band ring from the skirt when the closure is opened, and a band anchor (42) having a proximal end coupled to an inner surface of the band ring and a distal end spaced apart from the band ring, the band anchor being movable between a molded, unlocking position (Fig. 3) in which the band anchor extends at a downwardly-sloped angle away from the cover and toward a central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal end, and an attached, locking position (Fig. 2) in which the band anchor extends at an upwardly-sloped angle toward the cover and the central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal end and the distal end abuts against the band mount (43) to block upward movement of the tamper-evident band relative to the container, wherein the band anchor is formed to include a notch (Fig. 5, shown at 44) and the notch is configured to flex as the band anchor moves from the molded, unlocking position to the attached, locking position (Col. 3, Ln. 60 – Col. 5, Ln. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
452
473
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
331
166
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
263
451
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 2-4
Gregory teaches the band anchor (42) is formed to include a plurality of notches (shown at 44); the band anchor has a first thickness at each of the notches and a second thickness greater than the first thickness at a location offset from each of the notches; and each notch is spaced an equal distance from one another, as can be seen in the figures above.
Regarding Claim 6
Gregory teaches the band anchor (42) has a thickness and the thickness increases from the proximal end of the band anchor to the distal end of the band anchor, as can be seen in Fig. 2 above.
Regarding Claim 10
Gregory teaches the closure mount (28) includes one or more threads.
Regarding Claims 11 and 12
Gregory teaches the band mount (43) includes a rib extending annularly around the central axis; and the container further includes a bumper (shown below) coupled to the exterior surface of the sidewall panel at a location below the closure mount and the band mount and closer to the second end of the sidewall panel than the first end.
[AltContent: textbox (bumper)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image4.png
748
357
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 13
Gregory teaches a closure (24) configured to mount selectively to a container (22), the closure comprising: a cover (30), a skirt (34) coupled to a periphery of the cover and extending in a downward direction away from the cover, and a tamper-evident band coupled to a lower end of the skirt, wherein the tamper-evident band includes a band ring (38), a frangible connector (41) interconnecting the lower end of the skirt and an upper end of the band ring and configured to separate the band ring from the skirt when the closure is opened, and a band anchor (42) having a proximal end coupled to an inner surface of the band ring and a distal end spaced apart from the band ring, the band anchor being movable between a molded, unlocking position (Fig. 3) in which the band anchor extends at a downwardly-sloped angle away from the cover and toward a central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal end, and an attached, locking position (Fig. 2) in which the band anchor extends at an upwardly-sloped angle toward the cover and the central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal end and configured to engage a portion of the container to block upward movement of the tamper-evident band relative to the container, wherein the band anchor is formed to include a notch (shown at 44) and the notch is configured to flex as the band anchor moves from the molded, unlocking position to the attached, locking position (Col. 3, Ln. 60 – Col. 5, Ln. 5).
Regarding Claims 14 and 15
Gregory teaches the band anchor (42) is formed to include a plurality of notches (44); and the band anchor has a first thickness at each of the notches and a second thickness greater than the first thickness at a location offset from each of the notches, as can be seen in Fig. 5 above.
Regarding Claim 18
Gregory teaches the distal end of the band anchor (42) is located below a lower end of the band ring (38) in the molded, unlocking position (Fig. 3) and above the lower end of the band ring in the attached, locking position (Fig. 2), as can be seen above.
Regarding Claim 19
Gregory teaches a method of manufacturing a closure (24) for a container (22), the method comprising steps of: molding the closure from one or more polymeric materials, the closure including: a cover (30), a skirt (34) coupled to a periphery of the cover and extending in a downward direction away from the cover, and a tamper-evident band coupled to a lower end of the skirt, the tamper-evident band including a band ring (38), a frangible connector (41) interconnecting the lower end of the skirt and an upper end of the band ring and configured to separate the band ring from the skirt when the closure is opened, and a band anchor (41) having a proximal end coupled to an inner surface of the band ring and a distal end spaced apart from the band ring, and inverting the band anchor from a molded, unlocking position (Fig. 3) in which the band anchor extends at a downwardly-sloped angle away from the cover and toward a central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal end, and an attached, locking position (Fig. 2) in which the band anchor extends at an upwardly-sloped angle toward the cover and the central axis of the closure from the proximal end to the distal end and configured to engage a portion of the container to block upward movement of the tamper-evident band relative to the container, wherein the band anchor is formed to include a notch (shown at 44) and the notch flexes as the band anchor moves from the molded, unlocking position to the attached, locking position (Col. 3, Ln. 60 – Col. 5, Ln. 5).
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) 5 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gregory as applied to claims 2 and 14 above.
Regarding Claims 5 and 16
Gregory teaches all the limitations of claims 2 and 14 as shown above. Gregory further teaches each of the notches (shown at 44) has a first circumferential length about the central axis and each of the notches is spaced circumferentially from each neighboring notch by a second circumferential length (shown at 46) about the central axis. However, Gregory does not teach the second circumferential length being greater than the first circumferential length.
At the time of filing, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the second circumferential length being greater than the first circumferential length in order to better strengthen the band anchor. See MPEP 2144.05. Further, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to have the second circumferential length being greater than the first circumferential length, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A). As such, the claim of the second circumferential length being greater than the first circumferential length does not provide patentable distinction over the prior art of record.
Claim(s) 7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gregory as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Scherer et al. (US 2024/0208701) (hereinafter Scherer).
Regarding Claims 7 and 17
Gregory teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 13 as shown above. Gregory further teaches the frangible connector (41) includes a plurality of frangible segments.
Gregory does not teach each frangible segment has a triangular-shaped profile including a curved side facing toward the central axis, a first circumferential side coupled to a first end of the curved side and facing away from the central axis, and a second circumferential side coupled to a second end of the curved side and facing away from the central axis and away from the first circumferential side.
Scherer teaches a package (below – Fig. 1 and 11) comprising: a container and a closure (101) configured to mount selectively to the container, the closure including a cover (130) extending across a second end of the container, a skirt (131) coupled to a periphery of the cover and extending in a downward direction away from the cover, and a tamper-evident band coupled to a lower end of the skirt, wherein the tamper-evident band includes a band ring (202) extending annularly around the sidewall panel, a frangible connector (251) interconnecting the lower end of the skirt and an upper end of the band ring and configured to separate the band ring from the skirt when the closure is opened; and wherein the frangible connector includes a plurality of frangible segments (251) and each frangible segment has a triangular-shaped profile including a curved side facing toward the central axis, a first circumferential side coupled to a first end of the curved side and facing away from the central axis, and a second circumferential side coupled to a second end of the curved side and facing away from the central axis and away from the first circumferential side (Paragraphs [0095]-[0103]).
PNG
media_image5.png
386
501
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
330
536
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Gregory and Scherer are analogous inventions in the field of tamper evident closures. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify he frangible segments of Gregory with the teachings of the triangular-shaped segments of Scherer in order to provide frangible segments where the removal force is able to be applied to specific breakage points.
Claim(s) 8, 9, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gregory as applied to claims 1 and 19 above, and further in view of Allen (US 4190175).
Regarding Claims 8 and 9
Gregory teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above. Gregory does not teach the closure further includes a stacking ring coupled to a top end of the cover and extending in an upward direction away from the cover, and wherein a second closure is configured to be stacked on the stacking ring, the second closure including a band anchor abutting the stacking ring, wherein the stacking ring is positioned radially inward of the periphery of the cover to provide a stacking shoulder at a location radially outward of the stacking ring and directly above the skirt.
Allen teaches a package (below – Fig. 1 and 2) comprising: a container (10) including a floor and a sidewall coupled to the floor and extending in an upward direction away from the floor to at least partially define a product storage region, and a closure (12) configured to mount selectively to the container at a top end of the sidewall, the closure including a cover (38-46) extending across the top end of the container, a skirt (48) coupled to a periphery of the cover and extending in a downward direction away from the cover to engage with the container, and a band anchor (24/26), wherein the closure further includes a tamper-evident band coupled to a lower end of the skirt having a stacking ring (44) coupled to a top end of the cover and extending in an upward direction away from the cover, and wherein a second closure is configured to be stacked on the stacking ring, the second closure including a band anchor abutting the stacking ring, and the stacking ring is positioned radially inward of the periphery of the cover to provide a stacking shoulder at a location radially outward of the stacking ring and directly above the skirt, as can be seen in the figures below (Col. 2, Ln. 24 – Col. 3, Ln. 30).
PNG
media_image7.png
536
490
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
448
358
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Gregory and Allen are analogous inventions in the field of tamper resistant closures. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the closure of Gregory with the teachings of Allen in order to facilitate stacking of plural closures for shipment and storage (Col. 3, Ln. 26-30).
Regarding Claim 20
Gregory teaches all the limitations of claim 19 as shown above. Gregory does not teach the method further includes stacking the closure with at least one other closure with the band anchor in the attached, locking position such that a stacking gap is formed radially inward of a lower end of the band ring to receive a stacking ring of the at least one other closure to nest the closure with the at least one other closure.
Allen teaches a method of manufacturing a closure (Fig. 1 and 2) for a container, the method comprising steps of: molding the closure from one or more polymeric materials, the closure including: a cover (38-46), a skirt (48) coupled to a periphery of the cover and extending in a downward direction away from the cover, and a tamper-evident band coupled to a lower end of the skirt, the tamper-evident band including a band anchor (26/24) having an attached, locking position (Fig. 2), wherein the method further includes stacking the closure with at least one other closure with the band anchor in the attached, locking position such that a stacking gap is formed radially inward of a lower end of the band ring to receive a stacking ring (44) of the at least one other closure to nest the closure with the at least one other closure (Col. 2, Ln. 24 – Col. 3, Ln. 30).
Gregory and Allen are analogous inventions in the field of tamper resistant closures. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the closure of Gregory with the teachings of Allen in order to facilitate stacking of plural closures for shipment and storage (Col. 3, Ln. 26-30).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Further pertinent prior art includes but is not limited to that which is listed in the attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER CASTRIOTTA whose telephone number is (571)270-5279. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at (571) 270-5055. 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.
/JENNIFER CASTRIOTTA/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/NATHAN J JENNESS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3733 8 April 2026
Prosecution Insights