DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the interior surface of the neck portion including an internal thread formation” must be shown in Figs 6A-6C – without introducing new matter – or the feature canceled from claim 21 lines 3-4. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 21 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 21, lines 3-4 “the interior surface of the neck portion including an internal thread formation” contradicts the written specification and is unclear how the claimed outer “encompassing” (page 2 line 4 – not encompassed) annular skirt (Fig 6A, 342; Fig 1E/5B, 50) encompasses the second closure portion (Fig 6A, 314; Fig 1A/5A, 14) as claimed and can be both outside and inside the container neck to attach to this “internal thread” of the container neck. In other words, the embodiments are improperly mixed and the contradiction renders the claim indefinite. The claim states that the neck has an internal thread. The specification states that it is for the external thread of the skirt (Fig 5B, 52 of 50). These are two embodiments wherein Fig 6A [0084-0091] is “manufactured in the absence of external threading” [0084] thereby not included, as further specified “Other than the external thread formation… closure may be configured using the exact same or similar features” [0085]. Meaning Fig 6A does not have the claimed external thread for the neck internal thread. Therefore, since the claimed outer annular skirt (claim 21 page 2 lines 4-5 “annular skirt portion encompassing and extending from the polymeric top wall portion of the second closure portion”; repeated in [0089]) is impossible to place into the internal neck thread while being outside the neck, the claim is rendered indefinite. Note this is not a 35 USC 112a rejection since the drawings and written specification do separate the embodiments clearly. Examiner currently interprets as the second closure having both an interior skirt inside the neck to engage the internal neck thread and the exterior “encompassing” skirt as two distinct features.
Regarding claim 21, page 2 line 10 “the snap-on” lacks antecedent basis.
Claims 24-25 are also rejected for depending upon the rejected parent claim.
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 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
Claims 20 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by GB 2442227 issued to Liston (hereinafter “Liston”).
Regarding claim 20, Liston teaches a tamper-evident, snap-on, flip-top closure, the closure (Fig 11, flip top snap on tamper evident closure 110; page 9 line 6, the flip-top closure “snaps” on) comprising:
a first closure portion (Fig 11, a first closure portion of 110 is lid 125) including a polymeric (page 3 line 19, “The closure may be formed from… plastics”) top wall portion (necessarily including a top wall portion of 125), the polymeric top wall portion including at least one tamper-evident wing (Fig 11, two tamper-evident wings are “tamper-evident tab 130”), the at least one tamper-evident wing is detachably connected to a remainder of the polymeric top wall portion via a frangible connection (Fig 12, detachable frangible connections for the wings are “frangible bridges 132” shown connected to a remainder of the top wall portion of the first closure portion 125), the at least one tamper-evident wing forming an undercut (Fig 8, each 130 has an undercut),
a second closure portion (Fig 11, a second closure portion of 110 is base 120) including a polymeric (page 3 line 19, “The closure may be formed from… plastics”) top wall portion (necessarily including a top wall portion of 120 which is flange 124) and a polymeric (page 3 line 19) annular skirt portion encompassing and extending from the polymeric top wall portion of the second closure portion (Figs 8 & 11, skirt 120a extends from 124 and encompasses 124), the polymeric top wall portion of the second closure portion forming at least one locking recess that includes an undercut (Fig 8, two locking recesses are recesses 124a shown with respective undercuts), the at least one locking recess being sized and configured to receive the at least one tamper-evident wing thereon (Fig 8, 130 shown receivable in/on 124a),
a hinge connecting the first closure portion and the second closure portion (hinge 126 connects 125 to 120), wherein
in an initially closed position of the snap-on, flip-top closure, the undercut of the at least one tamper-evident wing corresponds with and lockingly engages with the at least one locking recess (Fig 8, shown closed while lockingly engaging each 130 undercut to their respective 124a undercut), wherein
during movement of the hinge from the initially closed position to an open position (Fig 12, movement closed to open), the frangible connection breaks leaving the at least one tamper-evident wing (Figs 12 & 15, each 130 broken) being lockingly engaged with the at least one locking recess (Fig 15, each 130 shown lockingly engaged to each recess 124a).
Regarding claim 22, Liston further teaches the at least one tamper-evident wing is two tamper-evident wings and wherein the at least one locking recess is two locking recesses, wherein
in the initially closed position of the snap-on, flip-top closure, each of the undercuts of the two tamper-evident wings corresponds with and lockingly engages with a respective one of the two locking recesses, and wherein during movement of the hinge from the initially closed position to an open position, the frangible connection breaks leaving each of the two tamper-evident wings being lockingly engaged with a respective one of the two locking recesses (similar limitation to parent claim, just with two wings and recesses instead of one. Already cited see parent claim citations).
Regarding claim 23, Liston further teaches the second closure portion (120) further includes a contoured area to assist in grasping the first closure portion for movement from the closed position to the open position (Figs 10-11, a contoured area of 120 under 125b and 124a/124 is shown capable of assisting grasping first closure 125 for movement from closed to open).
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 21 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub 20130220967 by Wang (hereinafter “Wang”) in view of US Pub 20170121064 issued to Taylor et al. (hereinafter “Taylor”).
Regarding claim 21, Wang teaches a package (Figs 2-5, “safety bottle cap”) comprising:
a container having a neck portion (Fig 2, a neck portion of container 9 is defined by lip 91) defining an opening (Fig 2, neck necessarily has an opening within to discharge contents through “discharge opening 213”); and
a flip-top closure being configured for fitment into the neck portion of the container for closing the opening of the container (Fig 3, flip-top closure 2/3 is shown closed and fitting on the neck closing the container), the flip-top closure including
a first closure portion (Fig 2, a first closure portion is top cap body 2),
a second closure portion (Fig 2, a second closure portion is bottom cap body 3), and
a hinge (33),
the first closure portion (2) including a polymeric ([0024] “The safety bottle cap is made of a plastic material, and comprises a bottom cap body 2, a top cap body 3, and a safety mechanism 4”) top wall portion (necessarily includes a top wall portion of 2), the polymeric top wall portion including at least one tamper-evident wing (Figs 2 & 4, a tamper-evident wing is “engaging hook portion 44”), the at least one tamper-evident wing is detachably connected to a remainder of the polymeric top wall portion via a frangible connection (Fig 5, 44 is shown detachably connected to a remainder of the top wall portion via a “snappable connecting part 42”), the at least one tamper-evident wing forming an undercut (Fig 4, 44 forms an undercut which is hook 442),
the second closure portion (3) including a polymeric ([0024] “The safety bottle cap is made of a plastic material, and comprises a bottom cap body 2, a top cap body 3, and a safety mechanism 4”) top wall portion (necessarily includes a top wall portion of 3) and a polymeric ([0024]) annular skirt portion encompassing and extending from the polymeric top wall portion of the second closure portion (Fig 2, annular surrounding wall portion 212/214 encompasses and extends from the second top wall portion), the polymeric top wall portion of the second closure portion forming at least one locking recess that includes an undercut (Fig 4, a locking recess with an undercut is shown as engaging hole portion 41), the at least one locking recess being sized and configured to receive the at least one tamper-evident wing thereon (Fig 5, shown received),
the hinge connecting the first closure portion and the second closure portion (33 connects 2 to 3), wherein
in an initially closed position of the snap-on (Fig 5, at least “snappable connecting part 42” necessarily snaps on closed), flip-top closure, the undercut of the at least one tamper-evident wing corresponds with and lockingly engages with the at least one locking recess (Figs 4-5, [0031], wing undercut 442 lockingly engages locking recess 41 undercut), wherein
during movement of the hinge from the initially closed position to an open position (Figs 2-3 & 5, hinged movement closed to open), the frangible connection breaks leaving the at least one tamper-evident wing (44) being lockingly engaged with the at least one locking recess (Fig 5, 42 broken leaving 44 lockingly engaged with 41).
But Wang does not explicitly teach an internal neck thread.
Taylor, however, discloses a similar tamper evident snap-on two-part closure (also having an outer annular skirt) comprising:
a neck portion having an exterior surface and an interior surface, the interior surface of the neck portion including an internal thread formation (Figs 4-6, an external thread 32 of a second closure portion engages an interior/internal container neck 44 thread)
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 neck of the container of Wang with internal thread as taught by Taylor to advantageously reinforce the cap to neck seal preventing dripped lost content from jostling and beneficially add sealing against the environment to keep contents fresher longer.
Regarding claim 25, Wang further teaches the second closure portion further includes a contoured area to assist in grasping the first closure portion for movement from the closed position to the open position (Figs 2, contour 216).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub 20130220967 by Wang (hereinafter “Wang”) in view of US Pub 20170121064 issued to Taylor et al. (hereinafter “Taylor”) in view of GB 2442227 issued to Liston (hereinafter “Liston”).
Regarding claim 24, Wang/Taylor does not explicitly teach duplicating the wing to two wings with two locking recesses.
Liston, however, discloses the at least one tamper-evident wing is two tamper-evident wings (Fig 11, two 130) and wherein the at least one locking recess is two locking recesses (Fig 8, two 124a), wherein
in the initially closed position of the snap-on (page 9 line 6, the flip-top closure “snaps” on), flip-top closure, each of the undercuts of the two tamper-evident wings corresponds with and lockingly engages with a respective one of the two locking recesses (Fig 8, the two wings and recesses engage), and wherein during movement of the hinge from the initially closed position to an open position (Fig 12, movement closed to open of a hinge 126), the frangible connection breaks leaving each of the two tamper-evident wings being lockingly engaged with a respective one of the two locking recesses (Figs 12 & 15, each 130 broken, lockingly engaged leave behind).
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 tamper-evidence of Wang by duplicating it as taught by Liston to advantageously reinforce the closure against tampering and stronger jostling thereby enhancing protection of the contents and the sale since customers want to know it is not tampered with. Also, it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (i.e. tamper evidencing is still produced). MPEP 2144.04 VI-B. Note there is no criticality provided by the Applicant for having two wings/recesses versus one.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC C BALDRIGHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 EST.
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 on 5712705055. 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.
/ERIC C BALDRIGHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Prosecution Insights