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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1,4,6-8,11-13,16-18,27-29 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Aguilar (US 2016/0288985).
Claim 1, Aguilar discloses an article housing box that houses an article, comprising: a box-shaped body (100) that has a main surface that is provided with an outlet forming portion (108) composed of an area surrounded by a closed curve (108), wherein the outlet forming portion includes: a plurality of folding pieces (110) that generate an outlet for the article in the outlet forming portion (108) by being folded obliquely upward (flaps 110 would fold upwardly whilst tissues are removed from the box) from the main surface; and a plurality of creases (fig.1; curved end of flaps 110 in solid line are the creases) for folding each of the folding pieces (110), and wherein each of the creases is formed along the curve (creases would inherently form along the curve; see fig.1).
Claim 4, Aguilar discloses wherein the number of the plurality of folding pieces (110) is between 4 and 10 20 inclusive.
Claim 6, Aguilar discloses wherein the plurality of folding pieces (110) have mutually congruent shapes.
Claim 7, Aguilar discloses wherein each of the folding pieces (110) has a sector shape.
Claim 8, Aguilar discloses wherein the plurality of folding pieces (110) are provided over an entirety of the area in a state of being unfolded.
Claim 11, Aguilar discloses wherein the plurality of creases (fig.1; curved end of flaps 110 in solid line are the creases) are formed along an entirety of the curve (creases would inherently form along the curve; see fig.1).
Claim 12, Aguilar discloses wherein the plurality of creases (fig.1; curved end of flaps 110 in solid line are the creases) have mutually equal lengths (see fig.1).
Claim 13, Aguilar discloses wherein the plurality of creases (fig.1; curved end of flaps 110 in solid line are the creases) have mutually equal curve ratios (see fig.1).
Claim 16, Aguilar discloses wherein the outlet forming portion (108) includes a straight cut line (see fig.1; straight cut line of 110 is inherently a part of 110 to create the individual flaps) that is formed along a side end part of each of the folding pieces.
Claim 17, Aguilar discloses wherein a plurality of the articles are housed in a state of being stacked in the body (tissue papers are stacked in the box).
Claim 18, Aguilar discloses wherein the article is a roll of sanitary paper. Claim 18 fails to further structurally limit the apparatus claim and only further limit the material handled by the apparatus and therefore does not determine patentability (see at least MPEP 2114,2115).
Claim 27, Aguilar discloses wherein the body houses a plurality of the rolls of sanitary paper. Claim 27 fails to further structurally limit the apparatus claim and only further limit the material handled by the apparatus and therefore does not determine patentability (see at least MPEP 2114,2115).
Claim 28, Aguilar discloses wherein the main surface (top of 100; fig.1) is provided with a plurality of the outlet forming portions (outlets covered by 104,105) that correspond to the plurality of the rolls of sanitary paper.
Claim 29, Aguilar discloses wherein the body is configured to be refilled with the article (see abstract).
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 2-3,9-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aguilar (US 2016/0288985) in view of Hsu (US 2022/0265097).
Claim 2, Aguilar does not disclose wherein an entirety of the curve bulges outward.
Hsu discloses wherein an entirety of the curve (50) bulges outward (fig.3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Aguilar with wherein an entirety of the curve bulges outward because it improves the functional purpose of the dispensing flaps to further easily grip sheets so that it easily separates from the rest of the sheets in the dispenser.
Claim 3, Aguilar discloses wherein the curve (108) draws a circle.
Claim 9, Aguilar does not disclose wherein front end parts of the plurality of folding pieces are apart from each other in a state in which the plurality of folding pieces are unfolded.
Hsu discloses wherein front end parts of the plurality of folding pieces (50) are apart from each other in a state in which the plurality of folding pieces are unfolded (fig.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Aguilar with wherein front end parts of the plurality of folding pieces are apart from each other in a state in which the plurality of folding pieces are unfolded because it improves the functional purpose of the dispensing flaps to further easily grip sheets so that it easily separate from the rest of the sheets in the dispenser.
Claim 10, although Aguilar does not disclose wherein the front end part of each of the folding pieces (110) is rounded, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement any number of arbitrary shapes for the front end parts since a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claims 5,14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aguilar (US 2016/0288985).
Claim 5, although Aguilar does not disclose wherein the number of the plurality of folding pieces (110) is between 6 and 8 inclusive, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement such a configuration since as it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 14, although Aguilar does not explicitly disclose wherein a curve ratio of each of the creases (fig.1; curved end of flaps 110 in solid line are the creases) is between 8 % and 21 % inclusive, .
15. The article housing box according to claim 14, wherein the curve ratio of each of the creases is between 10 % and 13 % inclusive, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the curve ratio limitation disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 19-22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aguilar (US 2016/0288985) in view of Carlson et al. (US 5,794,815).
Claim 19, Aguilar does not disclose wherein the body includes a cutting blade for cutting the sanitary paper pulled out from the outlet.
Carlson discloses wherein the body (123) includes a cutting blade (126) for cutting the sheets pulled out from the outlet (fig.9; outlet wherein 121 exits 123). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Aguilar with wherein the body includes a cutting blade for cutting the sanitary paper pulled out from the outlet because it enables the user to cut the preferred amount of dispensed rolled article that is desired for use.
Claim 20, Aguilar does not disclose wherein the cutting blade is provided at a position apart from the outlet forming portion.
Carlson discloses wherein the cutting blade (126) is provided at a position apart from the outlet forming portion (fig.9; portion that forms outlet wherein 121 exits 123). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Aguilar with wherein the cutting blade is provided at a position apart from the outlet forming portion because it enables the user to cut the preferred amount of dispensed rolled article that is desired for use.
Claim 21, Aguilar does not disclose wherein the cutting blade is provided at a periphery of the main surface.
Carlson discloses wherein the cutting blade (126) is provided at a periphery of the main surface (by 124). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Aguilar with wherein the cutting blade is provided at a periphery of the main surface because it enables the user to cut the preferred amount of dispensed rolled article that is desired for use.
Claim 22, Aguilar does not disclose wherein an entirety of the body including the cutting blade is made of a same material.
Carlson wherein an entirety of the body (123) including the cutting blade (126) is made of materials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Aguilar with wherein an entirety of the body including the cutting blade is made of materials because it enables the user to cut the preferred amount of dispensed rolled article that is desired for use.
Furthermore, although Carlson does not explicitly disclose an entirety of the body including the cutting blade is made of a same material, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement the body and cutting blade being made of the same material since 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.
Claim 30 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aguilar (US 2016/0288985) in view of Naylor et al. (US 2020/0299023).
Claim 30, Aguilar does not disclose wherein line drawings for coloring are printed on an outer surface of the body.
Naylor discloses wherein line drawings (fig.2) for coloring are printed on an outer surface of the body. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Aguilar with wherein line drawings for coloring are printed on an outer surface of the body in order to have a graphic box with an effect of motion that can be enjoyed by the consumer when viewed from different angles of rotation.
Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brouilette et al. (US 9,926,158) in view of Aguilar (US 2016/0288985).
Claim 1, Brouilette discloses an article housing box that houses an article, comprising: a box-shaped body (fig.6) that has a main surface that is provided with an outlet forming portion (where 8 comes out of 10; fig.6).
Brouilette does not disclose an outlet forming portion composed of an area surrounded by a closed curve, wherein the outlet forming portion includes: a plurality of folding pieces that generate an outlet for the article in the outlet forming portion by being folded obliquely upward from the main surface; and a plurality of creases for folding each of the folding pieces, and wherein each of the creases is formed along the curve.
Aguilar discloses an outlet forming portion (where 307 comes out of 300; fig.3) composed of an area surrounded by a closed curve (108), wherein the outlet forming portion includes: a plurality of folding pieces (110) that generate an outlet for the article in the outlet forming portion (108) by being folded obliquely upward (flaps 110 would fold upwardly whilst tissues are removed from the box) from the main surface; and a plurality of creases (fig.1; curved end of flaps 110 in solid line are the creases) for folding each of the folding pieces (110), and wherein each of the creases is formed along the curve (creases would inherently form along the curve; see fig.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Brouilette with an outlet forming portion composed of an area surrounded by a closed curve, wherein the outlet forming portion includes: a plurality of folding pieces that generate an outlet for the article in the outlet forming portion by being folded obliquely upward from the main surface; and a plurality of creases for folding each of the folding pieces, and wherein each of the creases is formed along the curve in order to effectively enhance the dispensing process by making it easier for consumer to remove a dispensed article from the container smoothly.
Claims 23-26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brouilette et al. (US 9,926,158) in view of Aguilar (US 2016/0288985) in view of Mohr et al. (US 2006/0201841).
Claim 23, Brouilette in view of Aguilar do not disclose wherein the body includes an insertion portion that is inserted into a gap in a center part of the sanitary paper.
Mohr discloses wherein the body includes an insertion portion (372) that is inserted into a gap in a center part of the sanitary paper (fig.19d). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Brouilette in view of Aguilar with wherein the body includes an insertion portion that is inserted into a gap in a center part of the sanitary paper in order to provide more stability for the roll inside the container, thus providing the consumer with ease of dispensing sheets from the roll contained therein.
Claim 24, Brouilette in view of Aguilar do not disclose wherein the insertion portion is composed of a part of a side surface of the body.
Mohr discloses wherein the insertion portion (372) is composed of a part of a side surface of the body (fig.19d). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Brouilette in view of Aguilar with wherein the insertion portion is composed of a part of a side surface of the body in order to provide more stability for the roll inside the container, thus providing the consumer with ease of dispensing sheets from the roll contained therein.
Claim 25, Brouilette in view of Aguilar do not disclose wherein an outer shape of the insertion portion is a regular n-sided polygon (n is an integer of 5 or more).
Mohr discloses wherein an outer shape of the insertion portion (372; fig.19d). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Brouilette in view of Aguilar with wherein an outer shape of the insertion portion in order to provide more stability for the roll inside the container, thus providing the consumer with ease of dispensing sheets from the roll contained therein.
Although Mohr does not disclose wherein an outer shape of the insertion portion is a regular n-sided polygon (n is an integer of 5 or more), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement any number of arbitrary n-sided polygon shape since a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim 26, Brouilette in view of Aguilar do not disclose wherein an entirety of the body including the insertion portion is made of a same material.
Mohr discloses wherein an entirety of the body including the insertion portion (372) is made of a same material (fig.19d). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Brouilette in view of Aguilar with wherein an entirety of the body including the insertion portion is made of a same material in order to provide more stability for the roll inside the container, thus providing the consumer with ease of dispensing sheets from the roll contained therein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AYODEJI H OJOFEITIMI whose telephone number is (571)272-6557. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, GENE CRAWFORD can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/AYODEJI H OJOFEITIMI/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights